CLOVERFIELD

39 Things We Learned From the ‘Cloverfield’ Commentary

6Share

 

Welcome back to Commentary Commentary, your weekly dish of directorial insight and/or, as indicated by last week’s column, shenanigans. This week we’re looking inside the mystery box with director Matt Reeves and uncovering what he has to say about our favorite recent monster movie,Cloverfield. Reeves did this commentary all by his lonesome, but something tells me J.J. Abramswas standing over him with a loaded gun lest Reeves divulge too much information. I’ll be listening intently for any Morse Code warnings or cries for help. Since this commentary track was laid down years ago, and since Matt Reeves has since directed Let Me In – more Morse Code messages. Hmmm – I have a feeling everything turned out okay.

So here, in all of its Slusho wonder, is what I learned on the Matt Reeves commentary for Cloverfield. I wonder if there are going to be any Lost secrets. I hope there are Lost secrets. Or Star Trek 2. Okay, wishful thinking is over. Shutting up now.

Cloverfield (2007)

Commentators: Matt Reeves (director), -. — - …. .. -. –. /  .- -… — ..- - /  .–. . . /  -.-. .- …- . … /  — .-. /  -.- .- …. -. .-.-.- /  .- … /  -.– — ..- /  .– . .-. . *

• According to Reeves, J.J. Abrams got the idea for Cloverfield while in Japan for the Mission: Impossible III premiere. He went to a toy store with his son where they saw a huge Godzilla display. Thinking, rightfully so, that Godzilla was seen as the Japanese national monster, Abrams and his son discussed a potential national monster for the United States.
• The fun of the project for Reeves was in the idea of the handheld camera, the idea of bringing a realism to this fantastical concept. Reeves liked the handycam aesthetic. The opening sequences in Beth’s apartment were filmed using a $1500 prosumer handycam. At first they thought it would look horrible when they transferred footage to film, but it ended up looking too good.
• The filming on Cloverfield bounced between shooting in New York City and shooting on sound stages in Los Angeles. You can tell which is which by the grime on the streets. No, not really. But maybe.
• Just as filming in Cloverfield went between New York and L.A., it also bounced between the actors and actual cameramen on the crew. The scene in the loft was shot on a stage in L.A., and the entire scene was shot by the two actors handling the camera in the film, Mike Vogeland T.J. Miller.
• T.J. Miller, a stand-up comedian, was chosen for the role of Hud due in large part to his ability to improvise quickly. Reeves felt this allowed the film an added sense of naturalism, since they didn’t have to stick to a set script or dialogue. Originally, Lily’s “testimonial” to Rob was going to be a straight testimonial screenwriter Drew Goddard had written, but Reeves felt that, like the non-traditional movie that Cloverfield is, the scene shouldn’t begin and end as expected. He would have Miller throw random dialogue to engage the actors or catch them off guard.
• During rehearsal, Reeves told the actors the most important thing they could do is just hang out with each other, get to know each other, and become friends, so that when it came time to shoot the film, the connections between them would feel organic.
• Drew Goddard hadn’t completed the script by the time they began filming. No script was used during auditions, and people didn’t know what they were trying out for. A lot of people thought they were auditioning for Star Trek, as Abrams had just been announced as that film’s director. Some people auditioned using scenes from Alias. Others used scenes Goddard had written specifically to get a feeling for the characters in Cloverfield. Even at the point of casting, the actors didn’t know what film they were going to be in.
• Lizzy Caplan was a fan of Felicity, and knowing Abrams and Reeves had worked on that previously, she initially thought they would be filming a handheld, 20-something, relationship movie a la Cameron Crowe. Her confusion only grew when she was given scenes from Aliaswhere a hypodermic syringe is plunged into Sidney’s heart. I don’t know about Caplan’s confusion, but I’m suddenly interested in a Cameron Crowe-directed Pulp Fiction remake. Any takers? No? Okay, moving on.
• The teaser that ran in front of Transformers was the first footage shot. It was actually shot during pre-production and served as part of the crew’s test to see how well they could do special effects using handheld cameras. Knowing they were on a tight budget, they tried using as much footage from the trailer as they could in the actual movie. However, Goddard’s script wasn’t finished at that point, either. The party scene was one of the scenes Goddard hadn’t fleshed out yet. Therefore, little bits of the trailer are used in the finished film, but most of the party scene was reshot.
• There’s a long pause where the commentary audio drops out. I just envision Abrams going over a point-by-point list of things Reeves can and cannot talk about here. Yes, gun still in hand. Still no dots or dashes heard. All is well. No, we don’t know the Man in Black’s name yet.
• The footage shot at Coney Island was actually shot on location, and was the last footage filmed for Cloverfield. The footage of Rob and Beth on the train was actually shot en route to Coney Island to shoot there. Several hours of footage with Rob and Beth on the train were filmed even though only a split second is used.
• As part of his preparation, Reeves watched several clips on YouTube. One clip in particular featured a party like the one seen in Cloverfield. Reeves lifted much of the spontaneity he saw in this clip for the film. Part of the difficulty and excitement for Reeves was in finding a way to mix this feeling of spontaneity and realism with a set story they had to tell. Instead of filming certain scenes from different angles, Reeves would have Miller shoot them several times from the same angle to allow the realism of the story to develop.
• One of cinematographer Mike Bonvillain‘s concerns was in using the auto-focus on the camera. He was worried that they would have no control of what was and wasn’t in focus at any given moment. Reeves felt this amateurish way of shooting would only add to the realism. The auto-focus wasn’t on throughout the entire film, but enough of it was included to get the feeling that it was on.
• From the moment the group exits the apartment building onto the street until the end of that sequence Reeves wanted it to be one, continuous take – “oners,” as they’re labeled in the business – as opposed to the stopping and starting of filming seen up to that point. He felt that if such an event were happening, Hud or whoever was filming wouldn’t turn off the camera. This posed some difficulties to the crew and especially the special effects team. There are cuts in this sequence, but they are hidden by fast sweeps or extreme closeups. Pre-viz was used to help Reeves and editor Kevin Stitt determine exactly when they would be able to use hidden cuts during this drawn out sequence.
• One of Abrams’s ideas in filming Cloverfield was for Reeves to take an extremely small crew to New York City and shoot guerrilla style on the streets. Abrams and Reeves felt that if enough was filmed there, the audience wouldn’t question the moments where green screen backgrounds are incorporated. They initially planned to shoot as much as they could on actual New York City streets over the course of two days, but the producers worked it out to give them a full week. Most of the key scenes, particularly those featuring New York landmarks, have some footage incorporated that was actually shot on location.
• Reeves found that one of the benefits in the non-traditional way Cloverfield was shot was that only one angle had to be used for any given sequence. They didn’t have to use multiple set-ups for one scene. Instead, the challenge was in the choreography of the scenes and figuring out the logistics of where to cut during oners. See? Now that I know what they word means, I can use it in a sentence. Oner. I like that word.
• Whenever a cameraman, crew member, or T.J. Miller as cameraman had an accident on set, they tried to incorporate it into the finished film to add to the realism. The shot where the crowd of people are running from the Brooklyn Bridge and Hud falls, that’s actually cinematographer Mike Bonvillain unintentionally falling while shooting. Some of the camera operators who had similar incidents on set were actually hurt. Reeves doesn’t give their names, though. We’ll never know their names. God rest their souls.
• While shooting on the streets of Los Angeles, the production designer, Martin Whist, got sponsoring from Sephora to dress one of the abandoned stores to make it look like one of theirs. People in the area were excited they’d be getting a Sephora on their street, but no one had the heart to tell them it wouldn’t be there the next day. The electronics store they film in is an actual electronics store in downtown L.A.
• The entire film was shot when Abrams stepped in with the idea that the group should run into a man who was going through a traumatic night, as well. Goddard came up with the idea that the man should be speaking Russian. The very brief scene with the Russian man in the alley was the last scene shot of the movie. This idea that there are thousands of other people going similar events and hundreds of them probably filming this night in New York City was also established early when the head of the Statue of Liberty lands in the street. You’ll notice several people in the crowd pull out cell phones to record it. I’m sure none of them are iPhones, though, because the 3G on this night would probably be a Nightmare of Elm Streetproportions.
• Goddard and Reeves knew they had to drive the group underground somehow. Reeves then saw a clip online of troops in Iraq who were going through a night battle. The drama and intensity mixed with confusion that Reeves saw in this clip is what led to the idea of the street battle between soldiers and the monster that ultimately drives the group to go down to the subway tunnels. None of the street battle scene was shot in New York. All of it was filmed at four different sound stages and sets built in L.A.
• Douglas Murray, one of the sound designers on Cloverfield, had worked with David Lynch onTwin Peaks and Twin Peak: Fire Walk With Me. He used some of the droning sounds from those movies to create some of the creepy sounds the group hears in the subway tunnels.
• The track built to serve as the underground tunnel was not very long, so the cast had to walk for a bit while shooting then turn around and walk the other direction to create an illusion that they were walking down a long subway tunnel. Overhead lighting was moved around to add to the illusion.
• Reeves was told the rats used in the tunnel sequence were the “best rats in the business.” He was also told they were the Pirates of the Caribbean rats. Reeves, who had never worked with animals before, was worried about time constraints. To his surprise, the rats worked well. So the Academy Award for Best Rat goes too…not Mickey Mouse in 2008. Nyuk nyuk nyuk.
• For the sequence where the parasite creatures attack the group, Reeves had had puppets made to give a physical impression that something was there. However, the puppets didn’t work and were taken out. The creatures are fully CG, and the actors are reacting to absolutely nothing in these scenes.
• Neville Page was brought onto Cloverfield even before Matt Reeves was signed on as director. Reeves remembers going into Page’s office and seeing numerous drawings and sketches all over the walls, what Reeves refers to as Page’s “Wall of Terror.” Some of the drawings were just body parts, reference points Page had that he would interchange between different, overall designs.
• According to Reeves, Cloverfield is the epitome of what Mike Bonvillain calls “J.J.’s Ball of Yarn Theory,” which is a way of creating big, elaborate films on a minuscule budget by using sleight of hand techniques or distracting the audience’s attention away from ways they work around not having a large budget. Bonvillain would always try to figure out ways they could do a scene or even the whole film just by using a ball of yarn.
• In Goddard’s original outline, the department store sequence came much earlier than it does in the finished cut and was initially to just be a transitional scene. It was Abrams’s idea that Marlena, Lizzy Caplan’s character, should explode from the parasite bite, creating a terrifying moment that serves as so much more than just a transitional sequence.
• Reeves brings up the idea of some people comparing the events in Cloverfield to 9/11. “I think we were always aware that it did in that we felt like it was a way of dealing with the anxieties of our time.” Reeves goes on to mention Godzilla again and how these kinds of genre films deal with real-life anxieties people have and how effective that makes them, but, at the same time, these films are a comfortable way for audiences to deal with these anxieties. Yes, they make us think about real-life situations, but there’s also a comfort that they are just silly monster movies. You know, except Gremlins, because that shit’s real.
• The theory of whether or not Rob and Beth survive at the end comes up. Reeves feels that their fates are ancillary to the efforts Rob goes through just to get to her. Because they are together in that last moment of the film and that they say to each other, “I love you” is the whole point of the story. It doesn’t matter if they live or die in that moment. They are together.
• The roof to Beth’s apartment building and Beth’s sloped apartment were the two biggest sets the crew had planned. They initially had to scrap plans to shoot the roof scene because of budget issues. Producer Bryan Burk came up with the idea for Hud to turn the camera on himself to give his “If this is the last thing you see…” moment to serve as a bridge cut around the roof scene. However, they worked it out in the budget to build the roof set but kept Hud’s line in anyway.
• The canted hallway set made many on set nauseous. Reeves feels that most think they just tilted the camera to achieve the effect, but Martin Whist actually built the set slanted as shown. The same went for Beth’s apartment which is now sloped. Reeves regrets not being able to shoot the apartment in such a way to capture for the audience how uncomfortable the set made the cast.
• The return of the parasite creatures in the high-rise building was shot in post-production after the rest of the film had been completed, as a friend of Reeves who saw an early cut of the film felt the city would be crawling with the creatures.
• The “landing zone” scene near the end of the film was almost scrapped due to a pipe bomb incident in New York City. Much of the scene had been shot on a stage in L.A., but a few particular shots needed to be shot at the intersection of 40th and Park. However, on the last night of filming in New York City they were given the okay to take a skeleton crew and get their shots.
• Reeves was seriously concerned with how well they could pull off the helicopter crash sequence. However, his mind was put at ease after seeing United 93 and knowing Mike Ellis and Double Negative Visual Effects, who had worked on the Paul Greengrass film, were on board with Cloverfield. Reeves was so struck by how realistic United 93 was, especially the last shot of the movie.
• The moment where Hud is confronted by the monster in Central Park was nearly cut several times before filming. The visual effects team were even concerned at how hokey the sequence would come off. However, Goddard, who is a huge fan of monster movies, fought tooth and nail to keep the sequence in. He convinced Reeves to keep the scene in by explaining how crazy it would be to have this huge monster movie where, near the end, the monster actually eats the guy who has been filming the whole time. Previsualization was used to map out ways to show the monster fleetingly, but it was Abrams idea to have the sequence show the monster full-on at this moment.
• The footage of Rob and Beth underneath the bridge in Central Park was shot under Greyshot Arch. Greyshot was an idea the production team bounced around as a potential title for the movie.
• The idea of having air sirens blaring in the background at the end was Steven Spielberg‘s idea. He felt the sirens would serve effectively as a countdown to the massive blast that eventually comes.
• Initially there was no musical score written for Cloverfield whatsoever. When Kevin Stitt originally showed Reeves the finished version of the film, he had included the theme song from Godzilla over the end credits. Reeves liked this so much that he had Michael Giacchino, a fellow lover of monster movies, write basically what is the Cloverfield theme that would have been used in a huge budget version of this same story.
• When they were creating the trailer, Reeves and crew wanted to ensure that people knewCloverfield was going to be a monster movie rather than a movie about a natural disaster or a terrorist act. They made sure to include dialogue in the trailer that revealed the characters in the movie were dealing with some kind of a creature. Members of the crew recorded a bunch of this dialogue themselves. It is Reeves’s voice that says, “I saw it. It’s alive. It’s huge.” He then came home one night during shooting to find a spectral analysis of what he had said released online. What Reeves said came out as, “It’s a lion. It’s huge.” This caused a massive rumor that it was going to be a Voltron movie.

Best in Commentary

“The thing that, when Drew and J.J. and I were talking, that was interesting to us story-wise was the way in which when experiences like this occur, when you go through this, it does immediately call into question the priorities in your life, and that kind of focused the whole story for us.” – Reeves

Final Thoughts

All in all, the Matt Reeves commentary on Cloverfield is insightful, interesting, and constant. It delves too much into technique at times. Reeves’s clinical way of dissecting how and where scenes were shot might have benefited with having Drew Goddard or J.J. Abrams on the track, as well, to discuss the story, especially the monster. There is very little about the monster divulged on the commentary track, and nothing specific is mentioned about where it comes from or any of the theories that have scattered around the Internet since Cloverfield‘s release. Of course, that could have been Abrams’s off-mic holding that gun against Reeves’s head. I can’t speak on what I don’t see or hear

THE FLY

33 Things We Learned From David Cronenberg’s ‘The Fly’ Commentary

Twenty-five years after its initial release, David Cronenberg’s The Fly is thought to be a modern classic, a highly effective mixture of science, romance, and terror that pulled in a much greater audience than the horror fans looking for a cheap thrill. Cronenberg has always been a director poised on horror as a higher art, a filmmaker who understands the grotesque and how much it is apparent in real life. Some, myself included, call The Fly his master work, and Cronenberg, a very intelligent speaker about all things, not just his own work, has much to offer the viewers of his film and the listeners of the commentary he provides that film.

So here, without any further ado or buzz or flitting around your head or what have you, the things we learned from David Cronenberg’s commentary on The Fly.

The Fly (1986)

Commentators: David Cronenberg (co-writer, director), gallons and gallons of dramatic goop

• The Fly came to David Cronenberg through Mel Brooks who was working with producer Stuart Cornfeld at the time. Cronenberg had read the screenplay for the remake before, but couldn’t work on it, as he was in the process of working on an adaptation of Total Recall with Dino De Laurentiis. The director was interested in the way co-writer Charles Edward Pogue had rewritten the original 1958 film, but Cronenberg felt the characters in the screenplay could have been differentiated more from characters in the original short story. Still he was impressed and surprised by how much the screenplay felt like something he would have written.
• The idea of the opening title card for THE FLY, the idea of it fluttering in, was done initially for the film’s teaser. Cronenberg liked it so much he incorporated it into the finished film.
• Cronenberg auditioned several women for the Veronica Quaife role, but he wanted someone who could match Jeff Goldblum‘s Seth Brundle in his eccentricities and stature. The director and Goldblum finally decided to look towards Goldblum’s girlfriend at the time, Geena Davis. Cronenberg found that working with a real-life couple meant he and the actors had to find a way to allow them to disconnect from who they were and find these characters who have just met.
• Cronenberg refers to the first designs for the famous telepod as “glass showers” much like how they looked in the original film. The director thought this was somewhat boring. The ultimate design came to Cronenberg and production designer Carol Spier when they went to his garage and saw his Ducati motorcycle. Cronenberg felt the telepods should have more of a machine element to them. In fact, the finalized telepods are the Ducati cylinder head structure turned upside down.
• “You really get into the nervous system of your actors when you’re directing, and it is like a fusion, a sort of Brundlefly fusion.” – Cronenberg on working with his actors, particularly Goldblum, who the director feels was perfect for the role.
• The director mentions he doesn’t think the original story by George Langelaan is a particularly well-written story. However, he feels the basic concept is stunning and “high concept.” Cronenberg believes it is sure to spawn a few more movies sometime in the future. No word on whether this commentary came out before or after 1989′s The Fly II. We’ll just assume it’s after and hope for the best.
• The name Brundle came from Formula One racer, Martin Brundle. Cronenberg generally takes names of his characters from the world of motor racing, as he is an enthusiast. The director notes this is interesting considering Seth Brundle suffers from motion sickness, one of the reasons why he invented the telepods.
• Cronenberg recognizes the theatricality to the movie, and, in fact, mentions how he was working on an opera adaptation with Howard Shore. He points out that most of the movie is three characters interacting in one location. “Four if you count the baboon.”
• The director mentions that watching The Fly for this commentary was the first time he had seen it since 1986 during its release. He makes notice by how disturbing yet emotional he finds the film to be. He believes that is one of the contributing factors to the film’s success, that it attracted an audience that generally did not see horror films, especially one as graphic as this.
• The idea of Veronica flushing the toilet while Stathis Borans is in the shower came about when Geena Davis was messing around on set. Cronenberg refers to this moment as one of the classics of film history and explains the concept of cold water rushing from an apartment and hot water moving to the shower. So there you have it. Pranks 101 with David Cronenberg. Who says the guy doesn’t have a sense of humor?
• The push-in shot of the baboon disappearing from one telepod was Cronenberg’s first ever motion control shot. In order to make the baboon seem to disappear the shot had to be done twice, one with the baboon in the telepod and one without. To ensure both shots are the exact same, computers have to be used to control the camera. This being the early days of such technology, the tracks the dolly traveled on were extremely large, and Cronenberg compares them to 19th Century railroad tracks.
• The idea of Seth Brundle mimicking Einstein in that his wardrobe is made up of the exact same outfit to keep him from using brain power to select clothing is one of the character elements Cronenberg added to the screenplay. In fact, the director states he has taken on this way of dressing himself since, but he says in his case it’s probably just laziness.
• “This is my version of the sexual awakening of a nerd.” – Cronenberg on the sex scene between Seth Brundle and Veronica Quaife.
• Cronenberg has interesting insight into the comparison between scientists and artists, how many scientists also have some kind of artistry about them. The director notes the cross-over between brilliant scientists and brilliants artists, how their creativity works and how they come up with solutions. He mentions how like Seth Brundle, many scientists seek answers through the comfort of producing art. In Brundle’s case it is playing the piano. “You can be a science geek or a science nerd, but it doesn’t mean you have no poetry in your soul or body.”
• The director notes the baboon used in the film became attracted to the script supervisor, Gillian Richardson, as she was evidently close to his height. Cronenberg notes this was a problem on set, and Goldblum, who was exponentially taller than the baboon, was able to dominate him. A subservient relationship grew between Goldblum and the baboon, who accepted the lead actor as the alpha male on set. The director goes on to talk about how you can’t train a baboon, and ways to make it look as if the one inThe Fly was performing had to be devised. For one scene, a living fly was attached to a fishing line and dangled around the baboon’s head.
• It always bothered Cronenberg that in the 1958 version of The Fly, the flies head on the human body was the size of a normal man’s head. No scientific or logical reason was given that the flies head would grow to human size if they were simply swapped. Another thing that bothered the director about the original film was the shot from the fly’s point of view, the classic mosaic shot of the screaming wife. “We all know that insect eyes have facets unlike human eyes, many facets, hundreds of them, thousands of them.” Cronenberg goes on to explain that each of those facets would replicate a different piece of the whole picture, not the whole picture itself. So there. Entomology 101 with David Cronenberg.
• The scene where Seth performs gymnastic moves around his apartment was obviously done by gymnast stand-ins. However, as Cronenberg points out, the gymnasts were not used to doing their moves in multiple takes. While competing, gymnasts train for up to years at a time to perform only once. They had to perform their moves so many times during filming it got to the point where they couldn’t do them any longer.
• Cronenberg notes in the scene where Seth is rambling on and on while continuously pouring sugar in his coffee that even though a lot of dialogue was written, Goldblum added lines in order to continue the amping up effect it had on his character. Cronenberg also notes this scene could have a parallel with someone being on cocaine, which was common in the 1980s. He also likens the Brundlefly fusion to a disease and the fact that when someone is given a disease, they always try to find the benefits to what is happening to them. “I really did want there to be a strangely attractive though dangerous up-side to the fly fusion,” mentions the director.
• When recording Howard Shore‘s score, Cronenberg remembers Mel Brooks questioning whether certain moments were too much. He particularly noticed how much the music crescendos when Brundle is walking down the street. “The guy is just walking down the street,” said Brooks. “No, Mel,” replied Cronenberg, “The guy is about to meet his destiny.”
• George Chuvalo, who plays the man Brundle arm wrestles in the bar, is the Canadian heavyweight boxing champion. He fought Muhammad Ali and George Foreman and was never knocked off his feet during his career.
• The song “Help Me” by Bryan Ferry was developed for the movie as a promotional tool. It was common in the 1980s to have a song written for your movie so you could have a music video running that promotes the film. Cronenberg doesn’t feel it fit in the movie and using it over the end credits, which was the original plan, was a complete disaster. Howard Shore’s score was just fine, and “Help Me” was left though barely audible during the bar scene.
• The line “Be afraid. Be very afraid.” came from Mel Brooks who said it casually during a conversation about the script. Cronenberg believes that as much as it has been mimicked and reused in films since most probably don’t remember it came from The Fly.
• Cronenberg notes the discussion that The Fly is really about AIDS. The disease was at its highest when the film was made, but the director says it is more about the general idea of aging, disease, and the inevitability of deteriorating. He feels this universal fear was another key element to the film’s success. Likewise, Cronenberg, now much older than he was when he made The Fly, is able to relate to the themes his film brings up. He finds the film to be far more disturbing now than when he made it 20 years prior.
• According to Cronenberg, the basic premise of The Fly, two lovers, one of whom contracts a disease and the other who is forced to watch and ultimately helps the sick one commit suicide, would never have been made as a straight drama. However, as a sci-fi, genre picture, the more serious, dramatic tones and the realism of what the film has to say was guarded. “But you have to consider how many people have given themselves their own death sentence in their bathrooms by discovering that thing in the shower or in the bathtub or in the mirror. That’s where the potency of those scenes comes from.”
• The director mentions a few times the importance of how much Brundle should be able to articulate what is happening to him. By late in the original film, the scientist was a complete mute, and Cronenberg felt this couldn’t have worked for his film. Cronenberg mentions books written from the first-hand perspective of someone who has contracted a terminal disease and how enlightening it was to hear in their own words what was happening to them. The way Brundle explains what is happening to him was drawn from these books allowing the audience to experience the disease even more so than if they were simply watching him transform. This was also important for the director later in the film when Brundle begins to literally lose his own voice.
• Cronenberg notes that even though it isn’t very realistic for someone, in this case Veronica, to only have two people in her life, he felt it important that her only source for comfort or support in dealing with what is happening to Seth is her former lover, Stathis. The director felt it important to emphasize the triangle at the center of the film and to help build Stathis’s motivations later in the film. In fact, The Fly originally ended with Veronica living with Stathis, but audience’s negative reactions – and Cronenberg’s own disapproval of such an ending – forced it to be cut.
• There are a few moments where Cronenberg notes a special effect that would have been done using computers had The Fly been made when technology allowed it. For instance, the scene where Veronica walks in on Seth crawling across the ceiling was done using a huge Ferris wheel and the set being built on that Ferris wheel. As Seth/Goldblum crawls on the ceiling and down the wall, the set rotated to give the supernatural appearance of someone able to do such a thing. Cinematographer Mark Irwin had to devise a system using mirrors in order to light the scene.
• About his own cameo as the gynecologist, Cronenberg mentions he rarely does cameos in his own films. He would prefer to hire actors for all of the roles in his films. However, Geena Davis asked him to play this part, as she felt more comfortable with the director being in this particular…um…position.
• A number of actors were approached for the role of Seth Brundle. Many of them turned the role down, as they were afraid of how much prosthetic makeup they would be required to wear late in the film, that their performance would be lost in the makeup and how much it covered. Jeff Goldblum was not afraid at all. He, in fact, welcomed the challenge. The makeup for the last part of the film took over five hours to apply before filming could even begin. Geena Davis would often sing and read to him while he was having his makeup put on. Cronenberg also notes Goldblum had to learn to speak with various kinds of prosthetic teeth in, and the actor had to work with a speech therapist throughout the filming.
• The “insect politics” speech was something Cronenberg came up with from his days as an entomologist. He was fascinated by insect societies, the division of labor, and the caste structure therein, yet they are very much not human.
• Cronenberg again mentions technology and CGI when discussing the makeup effects on Goldblum. The director finds an immediacy to the character and the performance that is generally lost when a CG performance is given or motion capture is utilized. This is particularly found in the scene between Seth and Veronica on the roof of the Bishop Straun School – they actually filmed there – where the director notes the emotion in the scene and how it could have easily been lost had it been shot using green screen.
• Cronenberg felt that in the final transformation, when Seth is completely gone and all that remains is a giant walking fly, the creature still needed some kind of human element to it for emotion. The articulation was still important even though the character could no longer speak. The director chose to give the creature emotional eyes, what Cronenberg refers to as “big versions of Jeff’s eyes.”
• Many epilogues were thought of to The Fly, most of them dealing with Veronica giving birth or not giving birth, giving birth to a perfectly healthy baby, and even giving birth to a butterfly baby which ended up being a dream. Cronenberg found that the ending they have was so shattering to audiences that nothing worked after that. The director feels the ending to The Fly is the same as the ending to The Dead Zone, another film where many epilogues were thought of but not used.

Best in Commentary

“It’s about mortality and the way that we deal with it and try to understand it and philosophies and emotional attitudes that we develop towards it.”

“The question of technology and science and morality and ethics is often raised in my movies, and there has been the kind of romantic concept of going too far, that you cannot assault the Gods. If you fly too close to the Sun, the wax holding your wings together melts, and you plunge to your doom. I don’t really believe in destiny, per se, but I think that it is innate in our nature to constantly change everything, to question everything, to try to understand everything, and it will inevitably create good and bad, and I don’t think there’s any stopping it.”

Final Thoughts

Almost as subdued as Christopher Nolan was on his Memento commentary, David Cronenberg lulls you into a calm, forcing you to hang on his every word. Thankfully, most of those words are filled with deep insight into both the concept and execution of this 1986 classic. Without a cast member or fellow crew member to bounce ideas off of, something that works for a lot of the commentaries out there, we’re left with only Cronenberg to speak to us.

This particular commentary benefits from that singular voice tremendously. The director never appears distracted, always seems on target with every thought he wishes to convey to his captive audience. The Fly is one of those films and David Cronenberg is one of those directors where you get the impression another commentary could be recorded with completely new information being brought to it, all of it absolutely fascinating.

UMBRAGE

rage (2009)

Reviewed by Greg Bismarck | Sun, December 25 2011

• Doug Bradley
 
• Drew Cullingham
 
• Horror
 
• Jonnie Hurn
 
• Natalie Celino
 
• Reviews
 
• Rita Ramnani

Directed by: Drew Cullingham
Written by: Drew Cullingham
Cast: Doug Bradley, Rita Ramnani, Jonnie Hurn, Natalie Celino, Grace Vallorani
"Umbrage is a dark fairytale, mixing mythology, horror, and western styles, to create a unique and intriguing film like no other."
So says the whoever wrote the liner notes on the dvd box, and they state the truth. Umbrage is like no other films I've seen, and I am very grateful for that.
Our dark fairy tale opens in the old west, where an unidentified gunslinger (Hurn) is a gunnin' for a mysterious stranger in a bar. It's interesting to note that these two seem to be the only ones in town. The gunslinger gets body checked by an unidentified woman, who proceeds to chow down on our hapless desperado, as mysterious stranger watches from the doorway.
Jump ahead to present day England. Jacob (Bradley) is bringing his pregnant wife (Vallorani) and 30-year-old 18-year-old assistant, Rachel (Ramnani,), to live in a secluded (read: isolated) farm house. We then discover that Jacob is an antiquities dealer who has just received delivery of a Babylonian obsidian mirror. A bit of dialog in the barn where the mirror is sequestered lets us know that Jacob has amorous designs on his pseudo-Goth assistant and that this is NOT one, big, happy family.
Now, bear with me, because without getting the whole story, you'll never know what a poorly cobbled together fucking mess Umbrage really is...
Cut to: Two total douches camping in the woods. A mysterious, hot female ornithologist (Celino) appears out of the forest, seduces Douche #1 off-camera, who loses his penis for his troubles. She comes back to find Douche #2, freaked out by his buddy's screams, and comes up with a story that "the shadows did it." And he believes her. No, really. Needless to say, the only place to run for help is Jacob's farm.
Blah-blah-blah miscarriage... Blah-blah-blah the hot ornithologist is really Lillith, who winds up being the girl who chowed down on our gunslinger about an hour ago... Blah-blah-blah the gunslinger shows up at the farm, hiding out in the barn. So, to this shit goulash, we now have the addition of a vampire cowboy with an Irish dialect, who spouts quotations.
I'm not going to spoil the ending for you, so... Okay, fuck it, you're never going to seek out this crap-fest, so: Lillith goes through the mirror, back to Hell. Our vampire cowboy follows her, and after having sex while standing the whole time, he dispatches her with one of Adam's ribs. No...really.
The first thing I noticed about Umbrage was the sound quality, or rather the lack thereof. Voices go in and out of hearing range throughout the movie. Seriously, I've seen Super 8 stag reels with better sound. Then, there is what I consider the hallmark of amateurism: shaky hand-held camera shots. I can only recall two shots where the camera was obviously on a tripod.
I don't suppose that I have to mention the poor quality of the writing. If you're still awake after reading my plot synopsis, I'll assume you got the picture. (If you're not awake, you obviously have more intelligence than the makers of Umbrage credit you with.)
Frankly, I stopped watching Doug Bradley's career after Hellraiser: Bloodline. It makes me sad to see that he's just collecting paychecks, and barely phoning in his performances. Every performance inUmbrage screams of actors from summer stock Shakespeare festivals slumming in cinema.
In summation, Umbrage is 125 minutes you will never get back. Instead of watching it, may I suggest that you, instead, hit yourself in the head with a skillet for five minutes. The result will be almost the same, and you'll save two hours.

DOCTOR BLOOD'S COFFIN

Doctor Blood's Coffin (1961)

Reviewed by Chris McMillan | Mon, December 26 2011

• Hazel Court
 
• Horror
 
• Ian Hunter
 
• James Kelley
 
• Kenneth J. Warren
 
• Kieron Moore
 
• Nathan Juran
 
• Peter Miller
 
• Reviews
 
• Sidney J. Furie

Directed by: Sidney J. Furie
Written by: Nathan Juran, James Kelley, Peter Miller
Cast: Kieron Moore, Hazel Court, Ian Hunter, Kenneth J. Warren
MOD DVDs are a boon to genre movie fans. Studios are releasing movies that wouldn't generate enough profits to make a wide release feasible, thus allowing fans to purchase films that might have remained in a vault forever. The cost is a bit of an issue (you can't wait for these titles to end up in a Walmart dump bin sale), but at least one can buy a decent quality DVD without resorting to bootleg copies.
That said, I doubt many horror fans were clamoring for Doctor Blood's Coffin, a recent addition to the MGM Limited Edition Collection. While the film does feature the lovely Hazel Court, its plodding story and lack of monster action dooms this 1961 British horror film to being little more than a decent time-waster you'd catch on television.
The film opens with a surgical-masked doctor about to operate on a patient. His superior interrupts the procedure, telling the doctor that human trials are immoral. Though the masked doctor protests, claiming his procedure could save the lives of brilliant men (at the cost of those deemed less worthy), he ends up storming out of the room as the credits roll, threatening he'll find a place where he can continue his research without moral constrains.
The film then moves to a small Cornish village, where Dr. Robert Blood (Ian Hunter) and his nurse Linda Parker (Hazel Court) are reporting the latest in a series of medical equipment thefts. At the same time, villagers have been disappearing at an alarming rate, so Sergeant Cook (Kenneth J. Warren) decides to form search parties to scour the countryside and abandoned tin mines the next morning.
Later in the day, Dr. Peter Blood (Kieron Moore) shows up at his father's office and admires Linda while she's bent over filing some records. Of course, Linda is a bit annoyed by this unwanted attention. But, as this is the early '60s, men will be pigs and women will forgive them, especially after finding out the pig in question is a handsome biochemist and the boss's son. Soon, the pair is flirting and taking long drives along the countryside and nearby coastline.
But I'm getting ahead of the plot. That night, the man chosen to lead the search of the mines is kidnapped and brought to a makeshift laboratory deep in the tunnels under the village. During the attack, the kidnapper leaves behind a shattered hypodermic with traces of a mysterious liquid, which Robert Blood rushes off to a lab in the nearest major city. Peter volunteers to guide the Sergeant through the tunnels, as he explored them during his youth and claims to know his way about the mines.
And this is the point where I should issue a spoiler alert. But it's not really a spoiler when the movie reveals that Peter is the kidnapper (and the masked doctor from the beginning of the film) within the first 30 minutes. No misdirection, no red herrings, no possible plot twists, nothing. The only mystery is what Peter is doing, which is reveled somewhere around the one-hour mark. And the film still has a half-hour to go at that point.
As one might expect, the plot takes a rather Frankenstein-like turn. Peter has found a way to take a still-beating heart and implant it into a corpse to regenerate life within the dead body. As mad scientist plans go, it's rather wonky, as all Peter does is slap the organ into the corpse and it comes back to life. Though he's using curare to keep his victims and their hearts alive during the procedure, the idea stretches one's suspension of disbelief past the breaking point. The film would have been better served with a bit more eerie chemicals or some simple electrical equipment — anything that would link the procedure with the more superior films that came before it.
And, as one expects, the plot includes the argument that a reanimated body is simply evil, as it has no soul. It's unfortunate this occurs within the last few minutes of the film, as the script never has time to explore the ideas. The monster just shows up, staggers about, chokes a couple of people, then dies once again as spilled chemicals fill the mine with poisonous gas. The script offers the audience no clue toward the creature's motivation, and its attack seems dictated simply because it's a monster and that's what monsters do.
A bigger problem with the screenplay is too much time is spent on the growing relationship between Peter and Linda, which we know will come to a bad end. It's obvious the script wants the audience to identify with Linda, but she is painted as the damsel in distress dating a madman and little more. It's not that we don't care for her, but we aren't given a reason to care. Had the script fleshed her out better, Linda's sudden Christian beliefs might have carried more weight during the film's conclusion.
And Peter is simply the scientist who wants to better the world by sacrificing those with wasted lives to keep more deserving men alive. (Once again, it's the '60s and I doubt Peter could think of a woman that would better the world with a prolonged life. But, if it's any consolation, all his victims are men.) And, as we know he is the villain of the piece, his struggles to stay ahead of the authorities, his father and Linda generate no real suspense. The script would be better served were it written like a traditional mystery, where red herrings abound, or had the monster been resurrected earlier in the film and let it loose on the village in a couple scenes.
For a MOD DVD, the quality of the picture and sound is very good. Just don't expect any extras, as the DVD doesn't even include a trailer. And, while it worked fine on my Mac, the cover advises that it might not play on any devices or PC drives other than a "play only" device. I figure I need to include that little warning, if anyone is relying on a computer or other devices to play DVDs.
But decent picture and sound quality doesn't mean one should run out and snatch up a copy ofDoctor Blood's Coffin. Even Hazel Court's presence isn't enough to recommend this film. As I mentioned, it would be a fine time-waster on a Saturday afternoon creature feature, with a beverage of your choice and perhaps a fellow horror fan or two. But as a full-price purchase, the movie fails to warrant such an investment.

THE DEVIL'S CARNIVAL

If you had asked me about The Devil’s Carnival yesterday, I wouldn’t have known what you were talking about. I probably would have assumed it was a 70s exploitation flick that took place behind a patchwork tent where a woman gets raped in a pile of elephant dung and then seeks revenge (or something). But I would have been wrong.

The movie is a new project from the overworked Darren Lynn Bousman, who has a full dance card but decided he wanted to put another record on. The teaser trailer for the movie is an extended, 11-minute-long shot of a woman (Emilie Autumn) going about her lingerie-clad business. It’s experimental, but it looks more like it was directed by Bela Tarr because it’s a lot of nothing. There are clever little notes that are struck with some cartoonish CGI, but mostly it’s a woman just hanging around doing nothing in particular.

Now, that doesn’t mean the movie itself won’t be a hellish explosion of style. According to Shock Til You Drop, Bousman is collaborating again with Repo! writer Terrance Zdunich.

Check it (and the poster) out for yourself:

VAMPERICA

Vamperifica (2011)

Directed By: Bruce Ornstein
Starring: Martin Yurkovic, Dreama Walker, Creighton James, Bonnie Swencionis, Jeff Ward

It wasn’t until I put Vamperifica into my DVD player, that I realized I had been avoiding Vampire movies. Somewhere just south of all the blood and sex, Vampire movies became overdone. Of course this is no reason to completely ignore the sub-genre, but it goes without saying that we can expect some truly awful instances of Vampire horror to arise. Lucky forVamperifica, this isn’t entirely the case as it boasts some truly original vampire development and humor. But is it enough to will me out of my too many vampires coma?

Vamperifica follows Carmen, a flamboyant college student who dreams of being a Broadway star and loves to yell about dirty whores and bitches. He gets a brutal wake up call however, when two vampires arrive to give him unsettling news. Carmen actually contains the reincarnated soul of a powerful vampire king and he now must help in populating the vampire race once again. The news comes with difficulty however, as Carmen finds it difficult to separate his friends from his new life as a vampire. Will he choose his new "life" or will he remain faithful to his friends?

Vamperifica manages to stay away from the normal conventions of vampire tales, by removing that whole romantic aspect. The relationship at the story's center is actually one of a very strong friendship instead. While not romantically involved, Carmen and Tracey provide an extremely touching and hilarious take on love. Their chemistry is the kind we yearn for after droves of shallow and boring vampires and their victims/ love interests.

Also notable here is the high level of sarcastic and crass humor. Who doesn't love people being complete bitches? More importantly, who doesn't love well written bitches? Hopefully no one. The humor in Vamperifica is certainly over the top, but it's over the top in a good way. It's not afraid to push boundaries and it does it mostly with a lot of tongue in cheek.

The overall storyline is creative for the most part, intertwining Carmen's past and friendships with the immediacy of his present situation as a bloodsucking vampire. What I loved most is that Carmen's homosexuality isn't a major plot point--that is to say Carmen is portrayed as an actual human being and not this whole other separate category. It's his story and he happens to be gay but Vamperifica is not a gay vampire movie and I think that's an important and valiant distinction to make here.

What bogs the story down however is that there isn't a whole lot at stake. We watch Carmen float from one situation to the next where the supposed conflict of choosing his friends or new vampire friends arises. The problem is that this never really feels like a conflict. We always feel and know that Carmen is going to choose his friends so therefore there's not a whole lot keeping us roped in. Carmen gets mad at someone then kills them in an entertaining and often gross matter, but then what? This lack of true motivation changes in a sudden turn in one of the characters which seems to be one last try at establishing a real conflict. The problem with that is that it comes too late and almost feels a bit forced.

Additionally while I loved Carmen's character, I wasn't entirely in love with Martin Yurkovic's performance. He has his shining moments but more often than not I noticed a few stumbles that felt a bit too unnatural. There's even a bizarre musical number midway through that is almost just too much.

Finally, the special effects vary in Vamperifica from completely awesome (head twisting, penises sliding down walls) to laughable (glowing red eyes that may or may not have been added with Paint Shop).

If only a few of the unnecessary instances of silly red eyes and a few other CGI blunders were removed, I'd sayVamperifica nailed it.

Overall, Vamperifica is a good watch. It's funny, original and even heart warming in all the right spots. What it lacks in story and plot, it makes up for in characterization and that's where it truly shines. Don't expect to be whisked away to the magical land of streamy vampire romances, or gay vampire sex scenes. Vamperifica is its own breed of fun, sass and blood and there's nothing wrong with that.

TEARS OF SORROW

THE WOMAN IN BLACK

THE MECHANICS OF CHRISTOPHER CONTE

---

The Mechanics of Christopher Conte Posted: 28 Dec 2011 06:56 AM PST Christopher Conte’s artwork is full of surprises. While many of the elements in his sculptures are machined, cast or carved by him, he also incorporates parts of familiar machinery that, if you’re paying close enough attention, you will recognize. Antique watch movements, sewing machine feet and other old cogs and gears give his sculptures a retro steampunk flavor, while other elements like iPod cameras push his work into the future evoking some of the greatest of scifi stories. Dermabot (Skin Crawler) | steel, bronze, and brass with working onboard miniature tattoo machine Christopher’s sculptures indeed capture the attention of a steampunk audience, but also the Transhumanist movement, which revels in the power of biomechanics for promoting human advancement and explores the dangers that such enhancements might cause, has taken a great liking to his work. Wired Magazine, a publication which has some of its tentacles entwined in the movement, has published multiple interviews and articles on him, and many Maker Faireenthusiasts, scientists and medical professionals who support it collect his work. In a seemingly ironic twist, Christopher is an avid collector of antique machinery and craftwork.  His curio collection includes old cartes de visite, typewriters, watches (and watch parts), scales and a myriad other relics. He is familiar with the antiques dealer crowd and often deals in antiques himself.  He is fascinated with clockwork and mechanics, especially that which shows a love for beauty and that which was built to last. The Curse of Timeless Existence | stainless steel, aluminum, and handmade polyurethane skull (1/2 scale) The antique elements in Christopher’s work seem to belie their futuristic qualities, but rather this is where the deeper meanings in his works lie.  While he looks positively into the future, his work reminds us of the high-quality craftworks of the past , how they have lasted for decades or even centuries, and will likely outlive much of what is created for our use today.  It’s a nod to the Transhumanist desire for immortality and enhanced life: The better the machine is made, the longer it will last. Scarlett | cast bronze with stainless steel, 925 silver, and garnet Recently Christopher and I talked a little about his past work in the prosthetics industry, how photographers love playing with his art, his antiques collection and the Transhumanist movement.  Take a peek below: Samantha Levin: Many people have talked about your past as a maker of prosthetics, but few know about your love of antiques and old craftsmanship. You have an extensive collection. How do these old relics influence your futuristic artwork? Christopher Conte: They do, on many levels. The first thing you can’t help but notice when observing an antique is the workmanship and quality compared to the products of today. These objects were constructed to last a lifetime, and in many cases outlived their original owners. That aspect alone begins to tell a story. And much like a good wine, better quality materials simply age better. I continuously think about this in reference to my own work. How will this material look in 100 years? – or a thousand? – What story will it tell about it’s past life? The idea of making something as utilitarian as a sewing machine into an object of beauty was a common way of thinking back in the 1890′s. Today’s sewing machines are made of white injection-molded plastic. Cheap to produce, yes, but not exactly inspiring design, nor do they last. Robots, on the other hand, need to be designed (and built) to last – so the connection there is fairly obvious, but attraction also plays a key roll in survival. A beautiful object will be cherished and better cared for by a human. This increases the lifespan of the object. It can then stand a somewhat better chance at surviving to inspire future generations. SL: Have you come across any new antiques that you’re particularly enamored with lately? CC: Yes. My newest typewriter, a Hammond Multiplex. I’ll share a photo with your readers…. I found this baby sitting in a window of an antique shop in Beacon, NY. It’s in nearly perfect condition. SL: Tell me more; are there any special details about it you are particularly attracted to? CC: What’s so interesting about the Hammond Multiplex is not only it’s unique shape, and great design, but also it’s innovative mechanism. Take a look at the photo, you’ll notice a cylindrical silver hub at the top center of the machine which is called the “turret”. That’s the key to the difference [no pun intended -SL]. Hammonds do not use type-bars (those are the arms that swings up and strike the ribbon on a conventional typewriter). Rather, all the characters are on a C-shaped type-shuttle, which sits inside that turret. When a key is struck, the type-shuttle rotates so that the desired letter is positioned in front of the paper. A hammer located behind the paper then swings forward and, from the rear, drives the paper against the ribbon and the type. The Multiplex was the first typewriter that allowed the operator to easily change fonts and languages, including italic and script typefaces with the simple twist of the turret. Variations of this concept existed well into the computer age, into the 1970s. SL:  It’s a beautiful instrument – the colors, materials and the shape are wonderful to look at.  I love how the keys seem almost like lace, and the shape of the entire thing is insect-like.  But this talk of your antiques collection brings up a curious question. The Transhumanist movement seems to have taken a strong liking to your work. Your love of old machinery seems to contradict this a little. What is your opinion of their views of the future? CC:  I’m a big supporter of the Transhumanist movement and happy to see them embrace my work. While my artwork might, at times, suggest a fear of technological advancements, I personally have no concern whatsoever regarding the path of technology. Better design and more intelligent systems will always prevail in serving mankind in more useful and productive ways. Just look at the way Apple has surpassed Microsoft in the past few years – better design and engineering finally won. I watched this natural selection process take place in the prosthetics field for 16 years. I look forward to a day where I can trade a perfectly healthy limb for a prosthesis and have it be an upgrade to what I currently have. SL: I see your work as being both a warning and a celebration of the future potential of biomechanics.  A warning because of what you mentioned earlier, that too many products are made without highly skilled craftsmanship and attention.  Can you imagine getting fitted with a mechanical leg that goes wrong just when the warranty runs out?  Such objects should be constructed to last a lifetime. Does this ring true to you? CC:  Well luckily for amputees, prosthetic components are not mass produced in China. The product testing and safeguards built into prosthetic parts are extensive compared to everyday products found in Walmart. As an example, a foot bolt (the single bolt that holds a prosthetic foot to the ankle- shank component) needed for a patient who weighed 300 lbs would need to be rated to 3000 lbs in a certified laboratory in order to be used in a prosthetic limb. Ten times the patient’s weight, just to be safe. That thinking lives within the DNA of my sculptures. SL:  Ironically, if things keep going as they have been, China may become the best place to get the most well-manufactured anything.  But moving on, you’ve worked with a lot of photographers who love shooting your work, which, with all the reflective material, is no easy task.  What are some of your favorite or noteworthy experiences you’ve had? CC:  Working with photographer Dennis Blachut has drastically transformed the quality of the photographs. He once worked as the in-house photographer for Tiffany Studios, so this guy knows a thing about shooting metal surfaces and extreme detail. And having successfully worked for Steve Jobs back in the 80′s (shooting the entire NeXT computer line) he also knows how to deal with an overly controlling client – unlike me of course ;) It’s been a wonderful experience to be around someone so skilled at his craft. For any challenge I bring him, he calmly figures a solution. I’m very lucky to have crossed paths with him. SL:  So, what are you working on currently? CC:  I’m currently building the third, and final, arm mic stand which I originally created for Adam Gontier, lead singer ofThree Days Grace. This last piece in the series is being constructed for a well known recording studio in Sweden calledMaratone Studios. I used the lost wax process to create the components for the arm. The process starts with wax models which are poured from silicone molds that had been made from my original prototype with the help of a company called Creative Models and Prototypes in Hicksville, NY.  The wax copies are then cleaned up and prepared to be set inside an investment cast (a mix of silicone and plaster). After hardening, this investment cast (a negative mold which captures the wax) is then fired in an oven to burn out the wax. While still hot, molten stainless steel is then poured into the cavities left behind by the burned out wax. After cooling, the last step in the casting process is to chisel away the investment material.