‘The Debussy Film’: The making of Ken Russell’s TV masterpiece starring Oliver Reed.
The Debussy Film is Russell developing the style and technique that would make him internationally recognized as one of the greatest directors of the twentieth century. His approach was revolutionary and brilliant, and The Debussy Film changed television and cinematic biography for good. It also revealed another side to Oliver Reed (who is quite brilliant) and Vladek Sheybal, who was usually typecast as KGB agents. The film also contains cameos form artists Duggie Fields and Pauline Boty. —Paul Gallagher
Before gaining worldwide fame for such daring and flamboyant films as The Music Lovers, Tommy and Altered States, English director Ken Russell cut his teeth at the BBC, making groundbreaking documentaries that featured re-enactments, and setting new standards in filmmaking. Ken Russell at the BBC earns an easy Highly Recommended.
- Ken Russell at the BBC — Elgar (1962)
- Ken Russell at the BBC — Always on Sunday (1965)
- Ken Russell at the BBC — Isadora (1966)
- Ken Russell at the BBC — Dante’s Inferno (1967)
- Ken Russell at the BBC — Song of Summer (1968)
- Ken Russell at the BBC — Ken Russell in Conversation
- Ken Russell at the BBC — Ken Russell at Work
The Devils audio commentary with Ken Russell, Mark Kermode, editor Michael Bradsell and Paul Joyce, recorded in 2004.
Director of Devils is a quasi-PR piece made around the time of the film’s release. Running 22-minutes it features Ken Russell, being driven somewhere, talking about the film and its controversy. He talks about the Huxley book, the large amounts of research that went into it, and even goes over the historical facts he unearthed. The film also features behind-the-scenes footage from the shoot, which offers alternate angles to certain scenes, looks at the sets, and even presents footage in the latter half of the film’s score being recorded for the final moments being recorded. Excellent little featurette.
Any film that succeeds in touching on deep themes through perfect comedy is bound to build a lasting connection with audiences. In his DVD commentary for Groundhog Day (1993) Harold Ramis recalls some of the feedback he received on the film and plenty of fun tibits from it’s production.
Bill Murray called it ‘probably the best work I’ve done’ and, 20 years after its release, Groundhog Day can still take your breath away. Its original screenwriter Danny Rubin and admirers such as director David O Russell explain its lasting appeal.
What a genius script looks like: Groundhog Day screenplay by Danny Rubin [pdf, scanned draft]. (NOTE: For educational purposes only)
How did you come up with the idea for “Groundhog Day?”
There’s so many parts to answering that question. I think the big idea, if there is a — the big think or the accidental happenstance was when I was trying to solve a story problem. If a person could live forever, if a person was immortal, how would they change over time? I was curious about whether one lifetime was enough for somebody. There are some people, those arrested development type men who can’t really outlive their — out grow their adolescence and I thought, well, maybe one lifetime isn’t enough. Maybe you need more. So, I was just thinking through if a person could live long enough, how would they change and that seemed like a cumbersome experiment because of having to deal with changing history. So, I was trying to solve the problem how you can have a person be immortal without having history change from underneath him so that the movie would not — the story of the movie would not have to deal with the French Revolution and with the future and things like that.
And then, to solve that, I remembered an idea I had had about a year or two before that about a guy repeating the same day and I realized that having a person repeat the same day turns an eternity into a circle and that’s when all the dramatic possibilities came and the comedic possibilities and all the resonances with repetition. So, that was the idea like that. I was actually getting ready to read one of Anne Rice’s novels about vampires and I was sort of thinking about why I thought that was interesting and the most interesting thing to me was that it was a different class of people. They were just like people except some of the rules were different and the most interesting one being that they were immoral and that’s what got me thinking about immortality. There, that’s all of it. —Big Think Interview With Danny Rubin
Screenwriter Danny Rubin, also a professor of screenwriting at Harvard, graciously agreed to come to Red River Theatres for Q & A following a screening of his beloved comedy/romance Groundhog Day. Coincidentally, Rubin’s Kindle Edition e-book on the screenplay How to Write Groundhog Day was released by Amazon.com the day before this appearance.
In his book, How to Write Groundhog Day, the man who wrote the legendary movie shares the story behind the film and his secrets for aspiring screenwriters. Here, his Top 10 rules for writers.
For the Warner DVD edition of “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?” the studio had Steven Soderbergh conduct an interview with director Mike Nichols and the result is one of the wittiest and most sophisticated commentary tracks ever. For the running time of the film, a listener is given the feeling of being in a private screening room with two Hollywood titans as they talk about a very important picture. —Joe’s View
Playboy Interview: Mike Nichols (June, 1966), pp. 63-64, 66, 68, 72-74
All material for educational purposes only.
Paul Thomas Anderson on filmmaking — part II at filmschoolthrucommentaries
Previously on Cinephilia and Beyond:
- Paul Thomas Anderson on filmmaking — part I
- Hard Eight (also known as Sydney) screenplay by Paul Thomas Anderson
- Hard Eight audio commentary (1996) with director PT Anderson and actor Phillip Baker Hall
- This is an exclusive, it’s never been released on any DVDs of the film, it stayed on the Criterion LD for ages — until it was ripped a while ago. So the only way anyone could ever hear this is if they had a LaserDisc player. Well, not anymore. “You can learn more from John Sturges’ audio track on the ‘Bad Day at Black Rock’ LaserDisc than you can in 4 years of film school.” Paul Thomas Anderson
![When Robert Altman made his final film A Prairie Home Companion, a standby director was required as no insurance company would cover the film without one. Paul Thomas Anderson acted as Altman’s backup on the set, saying, “Any hesitation? None. None at all, because I knew he wasn’t going to die.” Here he describes Altman’s last moments as a director.
The last day we shot the last scene, the one with Kevin with the garbage falling and him playing piano. That was the last thing we shot. And Bob definitely had a melancholy feeling about him, in his face. Because of the way the shot was, we were shooting the whole stage, so Bob was tucked over in Guy Noir’s office. Sometimes you get in these horrible places where you just have to be for the shot. And he had a Starbucks coffee in his hand and his coat was zipped up because it was kind of cold in there and he had his glasses on. He was staring at the monitor and he just looked really sad that it was ending. I think we only did the shot twice. I remember sitting there thinking, “Fuck, do it again, do it… do more, do more.” I wanted to do more — not cause it wasn’t good, but I wanted to keep shooting. Oh, I didn’t figure on this making me sad. I thought, “Oh great, I get to talk about Bob.” But it’s making me feel like I’m sure everybody feels — they really wish they could call him up. Yeah, fuck! Horrible, sad. He was so indestructible for so long.” —Paul Thomas Anderson on Robert Altman
That would explain the requirement that you have a stand-by director, who turned out to be Paul Thomas Anderson. Paul was very, very generous to do this. It’s amazing, I was really surprised. I never would have asked him to do it. He was at my side every moment I was shooting and he was a fantastic help. He never intruded, he never overrode me. I couldn’t even say goodbye to him, I would have broken down in tears. Certainly you aware of the homage he’s paid to you with films such as “Boogie Nights” and “Magnolia.” He told me he was a big fan of mine. I saw him after “Boogie Nights” and he said, “I just ripped you off.” [chuckles]. —Robert Altman on Paul Thomas Anderson
Paul Thomas Anderson dedicated his 2007 film There Will Be Blood to Altman.
PTA on filmmaking:
First part of a series of informative selections from PTA and Philip Baker Hall together. PTA is a known cinephile who comes from the same camp as Quentin Tarantino. A man who had immersed himself in studying cinema by watching a plethora of films and utilized the knowledge gathered from laserdisc commentaries in the late 80′s and early 90′s to learn filmmaking on his own. Of course not many people know he had a leg up in the industry as much as he likes to milk the “non-film school” card, but one can still admire the dedication of learning the craft by being a sponge, soaking up all kinds of filmmaking information. —filmschoolthrucommentaries
Previously on Cinephilia and Beyond:
Hard Eight (also known as Sydney) screenplay by Paul Thomas Anderson
Hard Eight Audio Commentary (1996) with director PT Anderson and actor Phillip Baker Hall
Paul Thomas Anderson claims that everything he knows about directing he learned from John Sturges’ commentary on the Bad Day at Black Rock LaserDisc
Tweet
//
Follow @LaFamiliaFilm
//](http://25.media.tumblr.com/4985bd4135d2b665663584c8d00fabb7/tumblr_mmhvr6i3FS1rovfcgo1_1280.jpg)
When Robert Altman made his final film A Prairie Home Companion, a standby director was required as no insurance company would cover the film without one. Paul Thomas Anderson acted as Altman’s backup on the set, saying, “Any hesitation? None. None at all, because I knew he wasn’t going to die.” Here he describes Altman’s last moments as a director.
The last day we shot the last scene, the one with Kevin with the garbage falling and him playing piano. That was the last thing we shot. And Bob definitely had a melancholy feeling about him, in his face. Because of the way the shot was, we were shooting the whole stage, so Bob was tucked over in Guy Noir’s office. Sometimes you get in these horrible places where you just have to be for the shot. And he had a Starbucks coffee in his hand and his coat was zipped up because it was kind of cold in there and he had his glasses on. He was staring at the monitor and he just looked really sad that it was ending. I think we only did the shot twice. I remember sitting there thinking, “Fuck, do it again, do it… do more, do more.” I wanted to do more — not cause it wasn’t good, but I wanted to keep shooting. Oh, I didn’t figure on this making me sad. I thought, “Oh great, I get to talk about Bob.” But it’s making me feel like I’m sure everybody feels — they really wish they could call him up. Yeah, fuck! Horrible, sad. He was so indestructible for so long.” —Paul Thomas Anderson on Robert Altman
That would explain the requirement that you have a stand-by director, who turned out to be Paul Thomas Anderson.
Paul was very, very generous to do this. It’s amazing, I was really surprised. I never would have asked him to do it. He was at my side every moment I was shooting and he was a fantastic help. He never intruded, he never overrode me. I couldn’t even say goodbye to him, I would have broken down in tears.
Certainly you aware of the homage he’s paid to you with films such as “Boogie Nights” and “Magnolia.”
He told me he was a big fan of mine. I saw him after “Boogie Nights” and he said, “I just ripped you off.” [chuckles]. —Robert Altman on Paul Thomas Anderson
Paul Thomas Anderson dedicated his 2007 film There Will Be Blood to Altman.
PTA on filmmaking:
First part of a series of informative selections from PTA and Philip Baker Hall together. PTA is a known cinephile who comes from the same camp as Quentin Tarantino. A man who had immersed himself in studying cinema by watching a plethora of films and utilized the knowledge gathered from laserdisc commentaries in the late 80′s and early 90′s to learn filmmaking on his own. Of course not many people know he had a leg up in the industry as much as he likes to milk the “non-film school” card, but one can still admire the dedication of learning the craft by being a sponge, soaking up all kinds of filmmaking information. —filmschoolthrucommentaries
Previously on Cinephilia and Beyond:
- Hard Eight (also known as Sydney) screenplay by Paul Thomas Anderson
- Hard Eight Audio Commentary (1996) with director PT Anderson and actor Phillip Baker Hall
- Paul Thomas Anderson claims that everything he knows about directing he learned from John Sturges’ commentary on the Bad Day at Black Rock LaserDisc
Ridley Scott on filmmaking — part II
The master who taught himself the craft by shooting over 2000 commercials within a span of 15 years discusses some of his thoughts on filmmaking.
The first of a series of Ridley commentaries. Ridley’s discussions are always filled with good information on technical side of things as well as the industry. Devour it.
An one hour documentary about the problems in the making of Oliver Stone’s Salvador (1986), Into the Valley of Death is an powerful, brutal and honest look on not only the film, based on a true story, but also the whole brutality that took place in El Salvador in the 1980’s with dictatorships financed by U.S. government.
Featuring interviews with Stone, James Woods, James Belushi, Richard Boyle (the journalist who lived the experiences that later became the movie, he’s portrayed by Woods on screen) and the U.S. Ambassador in El Salvador at the time Robert E. White, the documentary presents a small background of what was happening in the country; the difficult process of making the movie on location there and also in Mexico; the budget problems that made Oliver Stone refuse his payment in order to assure all the horses he needed for a battle scene, among other disasters and problems. What fascinates me the most here is how candid the interviewers are, specially the actors frankly speaking about the duel of egos they had with each other, and their dislike for the real figures they were portraying in the movie, of whom they met in a disastrous party.
But the best testimony comes from the ambassador, arguing about how different his persona was portrayed in the movie (Michael Murphy’s character) and is views on how bad the Washington bureaucrats acted in El Salvador, denying or overlooking the killings and abuses committed by officials and the government. Purely informative, with very good footage from the movie’s behind the scenes and also some disturbing images of the real deal in the Central America’s country, “Into the Valley of Death” will make you look at Stone’s film in a different way, more respectfully and more thoughtfully. You’ll really need to watch it again and examine that your perception on it will be changed. This is featured as bonus material of “Salvador” DVD.
Who’s Afraid Of Virginia Woolf? Audio Commentary with cinematographer Haskell Wexler. He chats mostly about technical issues like camera techniques, lighting, and various cinematographic choices. Wexler also digs into issues like sets and locations, working with the actors and Nichols, and the tone during the shoot. This track will work best for those with a significant interest in the technical domains.
With thanks to cinematographos
What was it like to work with Kazan on America, America, which is really so much a part of his life, a magnum opus; how much freedom did you have, what kind of experience was it?
HW: That was one of the toughest experiences of my life.
He has very precise ideas about what he wants to do?
HW: He was precise but he gave me quite a bit of freedom-that’s not the right word because it assumes that I have my ideas, he has his, and one wins and one loses. I did not feel visually restrained in working with him and I learned a great deal from him. One of the difficulties was that the film was so personal to him and he was so intense and intent. Also it was just plain physically difficult—a rather primitive situation, a rather low budget for us at the time. Of course Warners came in with money later on. But I greatly enjoyed it-all-Italian crew, I learned to speak Italian. Good spirits, fabulous spirits. Deedee Allan was the cutter, I spent some time in the cutting room with her. She can even make bad photography look good.
Do you like to have a look at the cutting?
HW: Oh yes, I do all the time. Partly, I think, it’s a selfish thing because I’m interested in a shot or a couple of the scenes-always afraid, almost like narcissistic actors whose best performance ends up on the cutting-room floor! I would like to say that it’s my interest in the film but I think it begins with the other… To tell the truth, nothing photographically is too difficult. I think the hard thing for me now is not to show off. I’ve got a good bag of tricks and I am always developing them. What I have to do now is use restraint, trying to concentrate on the story and make sure that what I am doing with the camera is not exhibitionism. You see I would like to make my own film. I want to direct. Everybody wants to direct. But I haven’t found a script. Recently I’ve seen about five scripts, all about hippies, but they are all written by people who don’t know anything about them. —The Danger Is Seduction: An Interview with Haskell Wexler, Film Quarterly, Spring 1968.
In this exclusive interview from Cinema Libre Studio’s release of LATINO, Tim Rhys of MovieMaker Magazine sits down with legendary cinematographer Haskell Wexler.
A portrait of a group of friends who have worked in the film industry, Daniel Raim’s Something’s Gonna Live is a must-see with its intimate presentation of some of filmmaking’s great contributors to production design and cinematography. Travel back to the makings of Alfred Hitchcock’s Birds and North by Northwest, listen to discussions on the question of film, what it is, its place in culture, and how technology affects it. Still, an essential part of the film, and maybe the most important aspect of all, is how the documentary portrays this group of artists. They are above all else, humble friends who support each other with their passions for work and respect for each other and their crafts.
The film is a warm and contemplative portrait of the aging Boyle and his friends as they visit their old stomping grounds at Paramount Studios and converse about ways the industry has changed, and most importantly, the creative values they learned over the years and hope to preserve. Full of indelible clips, it’s an engrossing movie for movie lovers, and it has recently been released on DVD and streaming sites such as Amazon and Netflix. (Filmmaker Magazine)
Here is part one of two of an in depth discussion and breakdown of how Nolan has shot the remake of Insomnia. Quite illuminating; learn and enjoy. For those who do not know, Chris is a self-taught filmmaker. You can find out more about it here. Also check out the DGA interview conducted last year which is quite illuminating as well.
Previously on Cinephilia and Beyond:
- Following audio commentary: Christopher Nolan talks about the challenges he faced while shooting his first film on a “no budget”
- Christopher Nolan: Self-Taught Filmmaker
- Christopher & Jonathan Nolan Screenplay Library
- 6 Filmmaking Tips From Christopher Nolan
- Christopher Nolan Interviewed By Renfreu Neff & Daniel Argent
Creative Screenwriting, VOLUME 8, #2 (MARCH/APRIL 2001) - Theatre of the Mind: A Christopher Nolan Profile
- Christopher Nolan Studies
A truly magnificent scripts series, please read and study: Taxi Driver original screenplay by Paul Schrader [pdf]. (NOTE: For educational purposes only)
Originally recorded for the Criterion Collection LaserDisc release of Taxi Driver, this track features director Martin Scorsese and writer Paul Schrader. Scorsese discusses his filmmaking style, shooting in New York, set design, casting, and plenty of other insightful tidbits. Meanwhile, Schrader discusses the rapidity with which he wrote the script, the themes of the story, the genesis of metaphor through theme, refinements to the script along the way, and plenty more. The commentators were recorded separately and later edited together. A moderator of sorts identifies the speakers and provides various background tidbits of her own.
Paul Schrader clarified the screenwriting development process in an interview with Richard Thompson from 1976 when Taxi Driver had just opened, Film Comment magazine, March-April 1976. [PDF]
Paul Schrader was 26 and destitute when he wrote Taxi Driver. In an interview published in ‘Martin Scorsese — A Journey’ he reflects on the origins of the script, its transition to the screen and subsequent reaction to the film.
Paul Schrader: Notes On Taxi Driver
In 1973, I had been through a particularly rough time. My marriage broke up and I had to quit the American Film Institute. I was out of work; I was out of the AFI; I was in debt. I fell into a period of real isolation, living more or less in my car. One day, I went to the emergency room in serious pain, and it turned out I had an ulcer. While I was in the hospital talking to the nurse, I realised I hadn’t spoken to anyone in two or three weeks. It really hit me, an image that I was like a taxi driver, floating around in this metal coffin in the city, seemingly in the middle of people but absolutely, totally alone. At the time I wrote it, I was very enamoured of guns, I was very suicidal, I was drinking heavily, I was obsessed with pornography in the way a lonely person is, and all those elements are up front in the script… Right after writing it, I left town for about six months. I came back to LA when I was feeling a little stronger emotionally and decided to go at it again.
Taxi Driver was as much a product of luck and timing as everything else – three sensibilities together at the right time, doing the right thing. It was still a low-budget, long-shot movie, but that’s how it got made. At one point we could have got the film financed with Jeff Bridges in the lead, but we elected to hold out and wait until we could finance it with De Niro. Bob was so determined to get the character of Travis down, he drove a cab for a couple of weeks. He got a licence, had his fingerprints taken by the police and hit the streets. The dialogue in Taxi Driver is somewhat improvised. The most memorable piece of dialogue in the film is an improvisation: the “Are you talking to me?” part. In the script it just says Travis speaks to himself in the mirror. Bobby asked me what he would say, and I said, “Well, he’s a little kid playing with guns and acting tough.” So De Niro used this rap that an underground New York comedian had been using at the same time as the basis for his lines.
I remember the night before Taxi Driver opened, we all got together and had dinner and said, “No matter what happens tomorrow we have made a terrific movie and we’re damn proud of it even if it goes down the toilet.” The next day, I went over to the cinema for the noon show. There was a long line that went all the way around the block. And then I realised, this line was for the two o’clock show, not the noon show! I ran in and watched the film and everyone was standing at the back and there was a sense of exhilaration about what we had done. Jean-Luc Godard once said that all the great movies are successful for the wrong reasons. There were a lot of wrong reasons why Taxi Driver was successful. The sheer violence of it brought out the Times Square crowd. I’m not opposed to censorship in principle but I think that if you censor a film like Taxi Driver all you do is censor a film, not confront a problem. These characters are running around and can be triggered off by anything.
When I talk to younger filmmakers they tell me that it was really the film that informed them, that it was their seminal film, and listening to them talk, I really can see it as a kind of social watermark. But it was meant as a personal film, not a political commentary. —Paul Schrader in ‘Martin Scorsese — A Journey’
Sam Peckinpah’s 2 hour film school: The track provides a two-hour film course on both film and filmmaker (NOTE: For educational purposes only. Unfortunately, the Criterion edition is out of print). Prince thoroughly analyzes each scene and performance while sprinkling his comments with nuggets of information about Peckinpah himself, and the result is an engrossing and exhaustive discussion about what makes the film so relevant three decades after its initial release. Prince is also the author of Savage Cinema: Sam Peckinpah and the rise of ultraviolent movies, among many other books and articles about film.
“It’s a film which has been attacked and condemned by most film critics and historians,” said Prince in his commentary. “(It) is Sam Peckinpah’s masterpiece and one of the most audacious and brilliantly accomplished American films of the modern period.” Straw Dogs has been essentially unavailable to movie viewers since its initial release, especially to those in Great Britain where it was been banned outright until last year. The plot involves an American mathematician, played by Dustin Hoffman, and his wife, Susan George, who move to an English village. Expecting a quiet retreat, they instead uncover brutal savagery, from unexpected sources.
According to Prince, Peckinpah presents his own director’s view of violence—shocking to every sensibility. The film is disturbing, and purposefully so. Prince thinks the movie might not be made the same way in 2003 as it was in 1971, because of today’s culture. As violent as “Straw Dogs” is, Prince thinks Peckinpah would be appalled at the level of violence in today’s movies. Peckinpah, he said, produced an artful film about the horror of violence, not about popularizing violence. “With all its perversity and darkness, this is a great film,” said Prince. “Peckinpah was at the top of his game when he made this picture.”
This is not Prince’s first audio commentary for Criterion. His analysis is featured on the DVD release of Akira Kurosawa’s “Red Beard.” He also wrote an essay for Criterion on Kurosawa’s “Rashomon.” Audio commentary is arduous but rewarding, Prince commented. He wrote his 60-page script in advance, tying it loosely to scenes in the two-hour movie, and then recorded the audio portion in New York” Prince is also the author of “Savage Cinema: Sam Peckinpah and the rise of ultraviolent movies,” among many other books and articles about film. He is currently writing a book on movie violence during the 1930-60 timeframe, when the movie industry’s production code monitored film content.
I am not saying that violence is what makes a man a man. I’m saying that when violence comes, you can’t run from it. You have to recognize its true nature, in yourself as well as in others, and stand up to it. If you run, you’re dead or you might as well be. —Sam Peckinpah
Pink Floyd The Wall screenplay. Here is your chance to download this historic Floydian document. Created in 1981 for ‘The Wall’ movie. This is the screenplay that was written by Roger Waters & illustrated by Gerald Scarfe.
Exhausted: John C. Holmes, the Real Story (1981) — Boogie Nights laserdisc commentary with writer/director Paul Thomas Anderson (scene-selected – 34 mins.)
Boogie Nights screenplay by Paul Thomas Anderson [pdf]. (NOTE: For educational purposes only)
A conversation with director Paul Thomas Anderson about his film “Boogie Nights”, which looks into the gritty world of the adult film industry of the 1970’s.
It will always boggle my mind that Paul Thomas Anderson made Boogie Nights when he was 27 years old, but it is a fact — one that’s hammered home when you watch old interviews of a young, nerdy-looking Anderson discussing the movie. Here’s a great two-part interview Anderson did with Charlie Rose around the time Boogie Nights arrived on the scene. During the chat, Anderson talks about Leonardo DiCaprio turning down the lead role in order to make Titanic, and how it was DiCaprio who suggested Anderson go meet with Mark Wahlberg. Years later DiCaprio would call that decision his “biggest regret” even though Titanic turned him into a megastar. “My biggest regret is Boogie Nights,” he said back in 2010. “I’m a huge fan of Paul Thomas Anderson but the first time I met him for that role I hadn’t really seen much of his previous work. Now I love that movie.”
The interview also touches upon Anderson’s fondness for shooting long takes, why he thinks film school is a waste of time, and, my favorite part, the origins of Rollergirl. Turns out Rollergirl is based on a character Anderson watched in a real porn movie that was hidden inside Robert Redford’s private stash. Wait, Redford has a porn stash? How Anderson wound up watching Redford’s porn movies is a funny story, and you can watch the filmmaker tell it below. —Erik Davis
Charlie Rose: What was the most important thing you learned from Robert Altman?
Paul Thomas Anderson: How to giggle and give in.
![The following transmission is an e-mail from September 2002, which I sent back to Criterion headquarters after spending a night at Hunter S. Thompson’s cabin in Woody Creek, Colorado, recording commentary tracks for the DVD release of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Reflecting on that peculiar night now, five years after Thompson’s death, I’m struck by how gracious our host was, giving so generously of his time and mind and supplies. It was clear he was struggling physically, but what I remember most about the session is the sense of humor in the room. From the random crank calls at four in the morning to the house full of booby traps like exploding pens and toilet paper that doesn’t unroll, the man really loved to laugh, I think, and that energy was absolutely infectious. When I left in the morning, my face hurt from cracking up. Wherever you are, Hunter, a thousand thanks! Mahalo, mahalo, mahalo. —Michael Wiese
I think the most interesting track on here, though, is the audio commentary by author Hunter S. Thompson. This is actually a group effort with Thompson the center of attention. Joining with him is Nabulsi, the commentary editor Michael W. Wiese, and Hunter’s assistant. Basically the three try to keep Hunter on topic. He claims his role during production was to keep the f—-ers in line and makes some rather rude comments about Gilliam, though it’s hard to know whether he should be taken seriously. He obviously likes the film overall and does throw praise, though isn’t afraid to be honest about what he doesn’t like about it. He has all sorts of anecdotes about getting the movie made, having Depp hang around and study him (which creeped him out naturally,) reflects on the time period and writing the story, expresses his (not so fond) opinions of Tim Leary, as well as his thoughts of his old friend Oscar Acosta. He veers off at times, but he covers everything he can. It’s an excellent track, and quite funny (he speaks his mind) but it is chaotic with the phone even ringing, which Thompson answers. Also, be prepared for a lot of F bombs, some derogatory comments, screaming, and Thompson snorting God knows what every once in a while followed by a squeal. Probably one of the more interesting commentaries I’ve ever heard.
“It wasn’t like sitting down and saying, ‘Let’s see if we can design a film that will capture the book, but maybe work for a mass audience,’” director Gilliam said. “There was none of that. It was ‘Can we translate this book into a film?’”
Screenplay by Alex Cox & Tod Davies, based on the book by Hunter S. Thompson [pdf]. (NOTE: For educational purposes only)
I was hired to write and direct this, by producers who were about to lose the rights to the book if they didn’t immediately go into production. Tod Davies wrote 98% of the adaptation while I was in Mexico City and Las Vegas - acting in PERDITA DURANGO. I was fired, and replaced by Terry Gilliam, who used our script. It took endless adjudications by the Writers Guild and interventions by the Directors Guild to get us credited and paid. Two submissions to the WGA, listing similarities between the shooting script and our adaptation, follow the screenplay, for those who enjoy a trip down masochism’s memory lane. —Alex Cox
Hunter S. Thompson shaves Johnny Depp’s Head — “Hunter shaved my head, in fact. I didn’t look in the mirror at all, I was in mortal fear. Hunter had a mining light… on his head – we were in his kitchen – and yeah, he shaved my hair.”](http://25.media.tumblr.com/f8e33608b56a892ad38d4a56d98dbafa/tumblr_mjw1aombLy1rovfcgo1_500.jpg)
The following transmission is an e-mail from September 2002, which I sent back to Criterion headquarters after spending a night at Hunter S. Thompson’s cabin in Woody Creek, Colorado, recording commentary tracks for the DVD release of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Reflecting on that peculiar night now, five years after Thompson’s death, I’m struck by how gracious our host was, giving so generously of his time and mind and supplies. It was clear he was struggling physically, but what I remember most about the session is the sense of humor in the room. From the random crank calls at four in the morning to the house full of booby traps like exploding pens and toilet paper that doesn’t unroll, the man really loved to laugh, I think, and that energy was absolutely infectious. When I left in the morning, my face hurt from cracking up. Wherever you are, Hunter, a thousand thanks! Mahalo, mahalo, mahalo. —Michael Wiese
I think the most interesting track on here, though, is the audio commentary by author Hunter S. Thompson. This is actually a group effort with Thompson the center of attention. Joining with him is Nabulsi, the commentary editor Michael W. Wiese, and Hunter’s assistant. Basically the three try to keep Hunter on topic. He claims his role during production was to keep the f—-ers in line and makes some rather rude comments about Gilliam, though it’s hard to know whether he should be taken seriously. He obviously likes the film overall and does throw praise, though isn’t afraid to be honest about what he doesn’t like about it. He has all sorts of anecdotes about getting the movie made, having Depp hang around and study him (which creeped him out naturally,) reflects on the time period and writing the story, expresses his (not so fond) opinions of Tim Leary, as well as his thoughts of his old friend Oscar Acosta. He veers off at times, but he covers everything he can. It’s an excellent track, and quite funny (he speaks his mind) but it is chaotic with the phone even ringing, which Thompson answers. Also, be prepared for a lot of F bombs, some derogatory comments, screaming, and Thompson snorting God knows what every once in a while followed by a squeal. Probably one of the more interesting commentaries I’ve ever heard.
“It wasn’t like sitting down and saying, ‘Let’s see if we can design a film that will capture the book, but maybe work for a mass audience,’” director Gilliam said. “There was none of that. It was ‘Can we translate this book into a film?’”
Screenplay by Alex Cox & Tod Davies, based on the book by Hunter S. Thompson [pdf]. (NOTE: For educational purposes only)
I was hired to write and direct this, by producers who were about to lose the rights to the book if they didn’t immediately go into production. Tod Davies wrote 98% of the adaptation while I was in Mexico City and Las Vegas - acting in PERDITA DURANGO. I was fired, and replaced by Terry Gilliam, who used our script. It took endless adjudications by the Writers Guild and interventions by the Directors Guild to get us credited and paid. Two submissions to the WGA, listing similarities between the shooting script and our adaptation, follow the screenplay, for those who enjoy a trip down masochism’s memory lane. —Alex Cox
Hunter S. Thompson shaves Johnny Depp’s Head — “Hunter shaved my head, in fact. I didn’t look in the mirror at all, I was in mortal fear. Hunter had a mining light… on his head – we were in his kitchen – and yeah, he shaved my hair.”
Philip Baker Hall and Paul Thomas Anderson on filmmaking:
Previously on Cinephilia and Beyond:
Tweet
Follow @LaFamiliaFilm