|
 
 I
always dug Mick Garris. The man is obviously a fan of the
genre and his affinity for it shines through his films.
Witness the morbid but beautiful feel of "Sleepwalkers", the taboo-breaking
"Psycho 4" or his "tour de force" adaptation
of Stephen King's un-filmable book "The Stand" (he filmed it and
it came out great!) and be convinced. I'm happy we have Mick
on our team, that's fer sure. I got to toss a couple of
questions his way and this is what he had to say.
1-
What's
your favorite horror movie?
MG: That’s a tough choice. I don’t really think in
favorites, and if I did, it would have to be in specific kinds
of films. My favorite old Universal classic would probably be either
FRANKENSTEIN or its
BRIDE. My
favorite recent, serious horror film might be SIXTH SENSE or
STIR OF ECHOES. Favorite
‘80s humorous horror might be AMERICAN WEREWOLF IN LONDON
and THE HOWLING; serious ‘80s stuff might be DEAD RINGERS,
THE THING and THE FLY. In
the ‘70s, probably THE EXORCIST
and CARRIE. PSYCHO
for the ‘60s, the obvious stuff.
2-
Looking back, how do you feel about "Critters 2"? Do you think
it improved
on the original? What
would you have done differently today on that picture?
MG:
It would be disastrous to think “I’m going to go out and
make a BETTER damned CRITTERS than CRITTERS.
All I could do was make the best sequel to a low-budget
GREMLINS rip-off as I could.
I’m proud of the movie, which I think is better than
a $4 million little creature feature could have been.
There are some nice, surprising moments (at least in
the context of its time—1988) and some good performances.
And it was nicely shot by Russell Carpenter, who won an
Oscar for shooting TITANIC. It was my first movie, and I was just starting to
learn.
3-
"Psycho 4" wound up being a pretty good film for a sequel to a
1960 film.
It was very daring (that incest stuff) and the cast was spot
on (props for the Henry Thomas casting). Any funny set stories
that you can share with us?
MG: There wasn’t a lot funny going on at the time. It was shot in 4 weeks at the Universal Studios in Orlando, and was
really more a theme-park attraction for the studio than a
movie (at least in their eyes, I think). So we would be shooting an intense scene outside the
Bates house, and 50 tourists in sandals and Bermuda shorts
would be quaffing beers and watching from behind a tape 50
feet away. Not
real easy on the actors.
The
cast was pretty remarkable, and it was great to have a script
by Joe Stefano, who wrote the original PSYCHO script. Olivia Hussey was wonderful to work with, as was Henry
Thomas. Henry got so
into one of the slashing scenes that he hurt himself.
As his Norman is committing a kill, he slams a butcher
knife into a piece of balsa wood at the bottom of a bucket
filled with movie blood. He
hit so hard, that
the blade of the knife slid right through the meat of his
palm, and
required stitches. But
never a complaint. I’d
love to work with him again.
Perkins
was sick with AIDS at the time, although he claimed not to be.
The tabloids were pronouncing it at the time, but we
were quite satisfied with his denials when it came to
insurance and all. He
was quite a character, and, thank God, really liked the movie
when he saw it finished. He
had wanted to
direct it, but the studio was not happy with PSYCHO III, and
wouldn’t
let him. So I came on
in a less-than-inviting atmosphere.
4-
"Sleepwalkers" was also pretty daring (more incest stuff).
I have to ask this: The corn on the cob
murder...who was responsible
for that: King or you?
MG: That was in King’s script, and was very much his
brilliant idea. But
we committed it to film with relish.
5-
Congratulations on "The Stand" mini-series. I never thought it
could be
done...but you did it. The film came out pretty good. Looking
back, what was
the hardest thing about doing that picture?
MG: Everything
was hard about doing that picture.
I’ve talked about it plenty over the years (and
there’s
six hours of commentary from King and a bunch of the actors
and me on the DVD), but it shot for five
months in six states, where the weather NEVER cooperated, with
a cast of 126 speaking roles. We
prepped for three months in Salt Lake City before shooting,
and did all the post-production in New York
for five months. I live
in LA, and I was away from home for over a year.
That was probably the toughest part of
all. Though my wife
Cynthia had a nice part in the film, it still kept us apart
more that it brought us together.
It’s difficult in a way you don’t think about when
you think about what it’s like to make a movie.
6-
I've heard that you prefer your version of "The Shining" to
Kubrick's version.
Can you
expand on why? How did King feel about the finished
project?
MG: I have never
said I prefer our SHINING to Kubrick’s.
I like the film a lot as a Kubrick film, though when it
came out, I was very disappointed with it as a film version of
King’s book, which
was, to me, a masterpiece. It was great to be able to make a
film from King’s
own script, and he
claimed to be very happy with it.
It is no secret that he was not entranced by the Kubrick
film. After the success
of THE STAND, ABC came to Steve and asked him what he’d like
to do next. It was his
idea to do THE SHINING, more directly based on the book.
7-
Having directed many genre films for TV, how much did the
censors get
in your way? Did
you ever have to give up a precious shot to appease the
censors?
MG: Always. And not
just for TV. I had to cut
parts of 9 scenes to get an R rating for SLEEPWALKERS. It went back to the MPAA 5 times before we finally got
our R. The network
was pretty hard on THE STAND, but not at all on THE SHINING,
which was much more brutal. We
only had to make two small trims for them.
8-
So far you've done mostly sequels ("Critters 2",
"Psycho 4") or
Stephen King
adaptations ("The Stand"," The Shining"). When are we going to see
an original
film written and directed by Mick Garris? Will it be horror?
MG: I wish I knew. I’ve
done a lot of work outside the genre, but little of it has ever
been produced. I
would love to do an original, but it’s the King work and other
material by best-selling authors or high profile producers that
goes in front of the camera. I
would love to do original work of my own, maybe adapting some of
the stories from my book. If
it wasn’t in the horror realm, it would still be, uh, not
exactly mainstream.
9-
Speaking of King, I heard that you have two King-related projects
coming up: "Desperation" and
"Talisman". Care to comment on them?
MG: DESPERATION is the most on-again off-again project I’ve
ever been involved with. We
were going to do it with New Line a few years ago, but they
backed out. I think people are afraid to do pure, pedal to the metal
horror that isn’t sprinkled with self-referential humor
centered around teenagers. And
it should be rough. It’s
possible that it might become a miniseries, but who knows?
10-
Of all the films you have directed which one is the closest to
your heart
and why? Which one do you wish you had never done?
MG: If I wished I had never done it, I didn’t do it.
I have a fondness for everything I’ve made, for various
reasons. You don’t
dislike a child because he’s not handsome or bright.
You love the geeks, too. But
my favorite bounces back and forth between THE STAND and THE
SHINING. I think THE
STAND
because it touched such a nerve.
I never thought I’d get the chance to make something
that everybody saw,
and most of them apparently liked.
But THE STAND seems to have found that place. It keeps getting voted best miniseries, and people always talk
about it with me.
I think
THE SHINING is actually a better example of pure filmmaking. It was made in a much more controlled environment, and I think
that—at least to me—it shows.
It was the first time I worked with Shelly Johnson as
director of
photography, and it really feels pretty complete.
Of course, that said, there isn’t a film I’ve done
that doesn’t make me wince and wish I’d done it all much,
much better, including the above.
11-
What horror movie era do you prefer? I personally think the 80's
had the best horror films. Then again, I grew up with them in that time frame.
MG:
Well, the 90’s, with a few exceptions, was pretty
dismal, filled with timid little formula copycats. The 80’s had a lot of verve, imagination, intensity.
Of course, they also had all those shitty, unimaginative
slasher movies, but that’s the price you pay. There were notables from every era, and like I said in
response to the first question, there is much to like about each
era. I really couldn’t choose.
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I'd
like to thank Mick for his time. Come back to the page anytime
and keep up the great work!
THE
ARROW'S COVERAGE OF MICK GARRIS' PANEL
AT THE 2001 SAN DIEGO COMIC CON
THE
ARROW REVIEWS CRITTERS 2
THE
ARROW REVIEWS SLEEPWALKERS

|