Ahoy, squirts! Quint here to present Ghostboy's interview with Ti West, director of THE ROOST, which is a nifty little indie horror flick that has been making the rounds for most of the year. It's getting a limited theatrical release. For info on that and Ghostboy's chat with Ti, read on! Enjoy!!!
Howdy folks,
There seems to be a deficit of horror films coming out this year. I don't count Doom, which leaves us with...Saw II and The Fog. Hooray.
However, if you're in one of six cities across the US, you can also see the limited release of Ti West's The Roost. This movie has had a bit of coverage here over the past few months, all of it well-deserved. I saw the film back in March at SXSW, and it was easily the best genre film I saw at the festival. In the festival coverage I wrote up for AICN back then, I called it "brilliant" (and also quoted my friend, world renowned vegan chef and filmmaker James M. Johnston, who called it "groin-grabbingly good") and described it as a something in the vein of Cabin Fever, only scarier.
Anyway, I just saw the film again - in its proper season, as it were - and I stand by my initial opinion. I also had the chance to talk to writer/director Ti West, and the resulting transcript is what I'm presenting here for your reading pleasure. Before I get into the bulk of the interview, here are the cities and theaters the film opens at this weekend:
NYC - Village East Cinema
Lost Angeles - Laemmle Fairfax
Austin - Alamo Downtown (I can't imagine a better theater to see it in)
Boston - Brattle Theater
Houston - Angelika Film Center
Dallas - Angelika Film Center
So do check it out, preferably at a midnight screening with a bunch of friends. It's terrific old school horror. You'll have a blast.
So, on to the interview...
GB: The Roost has some really great surprises in it, so I want to tread carefully in describing it. How would you synopsize it for people who haven't read anything about it?
TW: Well, essentially it is about four kids who get in a car accident and when they go looking for help…terror ensues. I realize that is the most cringe-inducing unoriginal sounding synopsis ever, but in its defense the film is very heavily “tone” driven. The style is really what separates it from the rest of the lot. There is a horror host bookend that controls the film, and an un-sarcastic “pulp” vibe throughout. Imagine you turned on a late night horror TV show in 1981…The Roost is meant to be like something you would legitimately find, without the post-modern self aware hipness of many films today.
Have you always leaned towards genre filmmaking, and is there a particular picture that inspired you to be a filmmaker in the first place?
Not really. I mean horror is by far my favorite genre (I am a geek) and I would like to make MOSTLY horror movies in my life, but certainly not ONLY horror movies. I am attracted to interesting stories...that’s about it. I have like 800 DVDs and I bet horror isn’t even the majority. Back to the Future is my favorite movie of all time (for whatever that’s worth). As for a film inspiring me...nothing specific...just everything I grew up watching and craving (“list obviously awesome horror movies here”)…That is what I interjected into The Roost.
Can you talk about how the film came about, both in terms of story, and then in getting the story to the screen?
It’s a really cool / totally lame story. To make a long story short, I knew Larry Fessenden. He put the idea of making a movie together on the table. I told him I already had a script (lying)...went home wrote it in two weeks...brought it back and he said “Ok, let’s see if we can get it made.” As for the story, I totally made it up as I went along. I didn’t have an outline or anything...just a premise and this determination not to fuck this “deal” up. This is a LITTLE movie...it’s a no-budget favor to me from Larry, simply so that I could direct a feature film right out of film school. It’s the greatest thing anyone has ever done for me...never for a second did I expect it to make it this far.
What was Larry's role as executive producer?
He was there from day one. His involvement is basically just supplying the funds. His motto for ScareFlix is “If you can make a film yourself, and the only thing holding you back is money…here’s the money, go do it.” There are no other rules, and I had total creative control. It is guerilla filmmaking at its finest.
There are four things that really elevate this film beyond what one might expect from a low budget horror flick, and I'd like to address each one separately. First of all, there's the look - the film has wonderful, underlit, ultra-grainy quality that seems more like an aesthetic choice than a budgetary one. Was this an important aspect for you? And for those technical folks out there, what film stock did you use?
The look is crucial to the film’s style. When you have no money and are making a movie entirely at night, you have to be creative with your resources. We couldn’t afford to light fields and fill every actor, so the approach was to have really high contrasty lighting. We used flashlights and headlights for entire scenes and I really liked the realistic approach of having characters walk in and out of total darkness. As for the grain, it was important for me to shoot on film (Kodak 500asa Super 16mm) and not video. I really wanted it to look like it was a late 70’s / early 80’s horror movie. I wanted it to look and feel like something you rented on vhs because the box cover was cool…and watched it at 3am in a fort.
Second, there's the sound design, which is really terrific. Can you talk about this a bit? Has any work been done on it for the theatrical release?
Sound is HUGELY important to me. It is so underappreciated in horror movies, and can a lot of the time be the scariest part for an audience. Also, sound is FREE production value. What you can’t afford to do visually, you can afford audibly. Graham Reznick and I have known each other since first grade and we have been working on each others films since high school. We lock ourselves into his basement and just go crazy with the scariest, weirdest, and most fucked up sounds we can come up with. For the non-filmmakers out there, you should know that there is a really scary time between locking picture during editing and adding sound design. There is this overwhelming fear that the movie might not work. Once you start adding wind, and crickets, and drone, it finally comes to life and you get really excited to work again. It is one of the most gratifying feelings during the entire process for me.
Likewise, do you have any words about Jeff Grace's score? You don't usually hear scores like this in indie films...it's really rich and intense.
Again, FREE production value. Jeff brought some amazing stuff to the table, and really elevated the film. I was insistent on having a lot of drone, feedback, synthy stuff, as well as screeching violins. Jeff got a quartet to bang out this amazing stuff in just two days and it really propels the film. There is a Bernard Herrmann-esque style to some of it, and I love that stuff.
The fourth thing, predictably, are the effects. The makeup effects are excellent, but then there are the CGI elements that you've managed to completely blend into this low budget aesthetic. Were you worried while you were shooting that this was the one element that might make or break the film? And how much trial and error was there in terms of getting the look right?
There was no trial and error. I told Maz the make up effects I wanted and he did them. Looking back on it, it’s amazing how well they turned out, and it’s really just a testament to his genius. As for the CGI, I storyboarded the bats flying in and out of dark shadows really quickly. The plan was to really conserve on detail. Again, it’s their genius that shows on screen...I can’t really take credit.
Were the Tom Noonan sequences in the original script, or were they added later?
They were added later. I had the idea during the original script, but decided I didn’t need it. On day two of shooting I decided to put it back in. It was sort of secretive so as not to get campy performances out of the actors. I wanted the movie to play it totally straight. The reality was, the movie was so far fetched that I figured it should get more and more pulpy and intense as it goes on, without making itself too self aware. Tom Noonan is THE BEST. He lives down the street from Larry and they walk by each other all of the time and would say hello. One day Larry handed him the script...he said “yes.”
I saw the film at SXSW, which, if I remember correctly, was its premiere. Can you briefly describe the path the film took from that point to now, on the eve of its release?
I have been traveling the world going from film festival to film festival. I just got back from Sitges in Spain which was amazing! This has been a really incredible experience. Again, I never expected the film to make it this far, so it’s all very overwhelming to be a part of all this. You cant really put into words what it feels like to be at a film festival with people like Quentin Tarantino, George Romero, Sydney Pollack, Robert Towne, Eli Roth, Greg Nicotero, Catherine Hardwicke, etc. and be treated more or less on the same level...it’s unreal.
How involved are you in the marketing process - or are you leaving that up to Showtime?
It’s still just starting, so I haven’t been too involved. I want to be as involved as possible, but I don’t know how well that will fly. They are doing the DVD and TV...Vitagraph Films is doing theatrical. As far as that goes, we are doing it ALL ourselves. We designed the adds, we are doing the press, we are using OUR posters, we are in total control. That is a great feeling. Imagine walking down the street in NYC and looking up and seeing posters for your little movie plastered all over a billboard next to Saw II and Walk The Line...it’s incredible (not to mention hearing your movie’s name on Moviefone).
I remember reading on your website that you were selling jeans at Diesel as recently as six months ago. Have you graduated from the 9-5 world now? Has the success of this film on the festival circuit (and, hopefully, at the box office over the next month) made it easier to get your next project moving?
No…I am moving to LA on Friday to pursue selling jeans at a new location (Diesel Beverly Center…Come say, hello). Last week I was in Spain, sitting in a bar talking one-on-one with Tarantino about awesome 80s movie, snd this week I am back in the mall selling clothes. It’s bizarre. As for making things easier...yes and no. I have had a million meetings, but a lot of that is bullshit. It’s hard because this time around I am asking for “real money” to make a movie. I don’t want to make another $50,000 movie, I want to make a $1,000,000 movie. I think I scare some people. People are queasy about giving a young filmmaker who had total control on his last film, and who made some pretty risky choices, s bunch of their money. It’s a lot easier to give it to a commercial director who will crank out the expected (safe) fluff.
And on that note...what is your next project, assuming you have one?
I have a script set up with the executive producers of History of Violence that I am hoping to get a spring start date. I have other scripts out there too, but this seems to be the one that is going to go first. I have been asked to direct a few movies, but nothing worth doing. I work really fast…apparently nobody else does. So it’s slowly but surely for everything. I can’t say much about the next movie yet, but if you hate The Roost don’t count me out yet…
Here's a totally random question that just popped into my head: did you ever see that really bad movie that came out this same weekend back in 1999 called Bats, starring Lou Diamond Phillips?
Yeah, I watched it right before we shot the movie. It sucks.
******
And that's it. Again, this is the best first-run horror experience you can have in theaters this Halloween, so don't miss it.
I'll be back shortly with an interview with a Canadian filmmaker who has recently had some frustrating issues with the MPAA.
Until then...something something....
