(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi35.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd179%2Fpolkablues%2Frunning_scared.jpg&hash=3eb809223cbc68d1d5a42d1ee5db2e7bd81ef407)
http://www.apple.com/trailers/newline/running_scared/
So here's the thing: this is going to be a good flick. It'll be violent, crazy, and entertaining as hell.
Here's the problem: if I actually like a movie starring Paul Walker, I might die. It'd be like going to a parallel universe and touching the alternate me. I'd cease to exist.
Damn you, Wayne Kramer. First you make me look at William H. Macy naked, now you force me to like Paul Walker. Damn you straight to hell.
www.runningscaredthemovie.com
The first 6 minutes are online, and they're pretty fun. Even if you have no desire to see the movie, watch the opening for the amazing shotgun blast. Fuck, I'm gonna end up seeing this. It just better not turn into a Tony Scott-ADD-disaster. But there's some positive buzz, so who knows.
Are you fucking kidding me!?
I have laughed at this piece of shit trailer every time I've seen it... so has just about everyone I've seen it with.
This looks like utter shit... an absolute turd and a half... this looks like it's not even good enough to be a shitty Guy Ritchie flick.
laughably bad
You see, but I'm someone who loves Lock Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels. And this looks like a pretty good approximation of that. Besides, check out some of the advance reviews on it; everybody's surprised by how much they like it.
yes, i too laughed at the preview everytime i saw it like RK. mostly paul walker and the 'urban' target audience made it seem TERRIBLE. and strangely enough a week ago i saw one again and this time it seemed like it might be good. then i read the AICN review and it mentioned it was by the guy who did The Cooler which i had no idea. i would've assumed it was by the guy who did The Rap Videos. so i might have to check this out on dvd, if the buzz continues strongly. though i did fall for that on the Assault on Precinct 13 remake which was as i had first suspected a total waste of time.
The most divisive movie of the year so far has arrived....
Ebert had some fun with his review, here (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060223/REVIEWS/60222003).
I'm definitely going to see this this weekend, if I get a chance. It's been too long before I just got to have fun seeing a movie in the theatre. I'll let y'all know how it is.
yes, do. i was burned last year at around this time by believing the hype for the Assault On Precinct 13 remake which i luckily waited to rent but still thought i was in for something good. so, i'll rent this but i'm not expecting much.
Yowzers! Ebert's review is spot on-- this movie is gloriously over-the-top in every way possible. Holy hell, it's crazy violent, Kramer peppers some of the gunfights with some alarmingly brutal gore. If you know you're gonna see it, don't read any more reviews, there is some wild shit in here that you will never see coming. I'm not gonna bullshit you-- the movie has it's problems, but there's too much fun and craziness to give it a thumbs down. *Shock* Paul Walker's actually pretty good in this. Who knew? Thank God it's not as ADD as Domino, it's obvious shots were, you know, planned out.
This movie was exactly what I expected it to be. A tremendous amount of fun, a handful of extremely effective sequences, and a heaping big scoop of absurdity. I would recommend it to anyone. Paul Walker's great in it, Vera Farmiga's going to (finally) be someone you've heard of, and you'll never be able to watch Bruce Altman and Elizabeth Mitchell the same way again.
If only the script had gotten a once-over from someone with an ear for memorable lines, like a Chris McQuarrie or a Brian Helgeland, it would be an instant classic. As it is, it's just good. WAY the hell better than Assault on Precinct 13 was.
What polka and Weak said.
It ranks up there with Ghost Dog in the gloriously inane b-action category.
This was a hell of a ride. It's a sick, twisted, goofy, violent mess. It's like an over the top melodrama filled with ideas. I wouldn't say it's "well made" but I was never bored.
Tarantino says,
"This is why they call them Motion Pictures! With 'Running Scared', writer/director Wayne Kramer does a broad jump into the director pantheon of action film greats like Walter Hill and Robert Aldrich. No matter what you read or hear, nothing will quite prepare you for the thrust and viscera of this night at the movies. This is filmmaking from the pelvis."
where was that printed?
Quote from: squints on March 01, 2006, 11:56:10 PM
where was that printed?
right here, xixax exclusive!
tarantino will go anywhere to talk about his pelvis. (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi5.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy154%2Fpubrick%2Fsmileysquig.png&hash=159de7233d6cece856837de2965cdf9e7ea0c985)
it was a blurb on a Running Scared ad in TimeOut NY.
I just saw this the other night, and overall, a really entertaining piece (like most of the people who replied here).
The only thing that bugged me I would say were the credits (intro & outro), they did not fit the theme of the movie at all. So it seemed out of place... I guess you could say that about plenty of sequences in this thing!?
Mod, I'm thinking you'd like this.
I found it to be better than Domino and just as crazy. It's crazy not only in style but in content. As has been said the story goes places that you'd never think (with actors that you might not think of either, ie Santa Clause II). And watching this after the Oscars with their "you have to watch epics in the theater" It was indeed really nice to see lots of Film Grain projected all big on the screen. Fun times indeed.
10 Questions: Wayne Kramer
The director of Running Scared and The Cooler!
Wayne Kramer is the screenwriter-director of Running Scared, currently in theaters, and of 2003's The Cooler, which starred William H. Macy and Oscar nominee Alec Baldwin. Kramer is also a credited screenwriter on Mindhunters.
Mr. Kramer was kind enough to speak with IGN FilmForce and answer our 10 Questions.
1. What is your favorite piece of music?
Out of Africa, Frances, Body Heat, Diamonds Are Forever.
2. What is your favorite film?
Chinatown.
3. What is your favorite TV program, past or current?
The Charlie Rose Show (non-fiction). The Sopranos (fiction).
4. What do you feel has been your most important professional accomplishment to date?
Getting Running Scared made. It was a controversial, challenging script and few people ever thought it would get made.
5. Which project do you feel didn't live up to what you envisioned?
I wrote the original screenplay to Mindhunters and it was rewritten (dumbed down) by a dozen writers. The finished movie bears very little resemblance to my original work. I don't have a line of dialogue left in the film and very little of my original storyline.
6. What is your favorite book?
Man, that's a tough one. Probably a three way tie amongst The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand, Replay by Ken Grimwood and The Black Dahlia by James Ellroy.
7. If you could change one thing about the industry, what would it be?
Just one thing? How about two: dump the PG-13 rating. It's (expletive) the R rating in the (expletive). And have the studios take more risks with lesser known stars or older, but still interesting actors. A good example of that would be Tarantino's support for Robert Forster in Jackie Brown.
8. Who – or what – would you say has had the biggest influence on your career?
I feel I've been most influenced by directors like Sam Peckinpah, Don Siegel, Brian De Palma, Walter Hill and Michael Mann. But I wouldn't be considered a director today if veteran producer Ed Pressman hadn't taken a shot on me to direct The Cooler. I also credit William H. Macy with supporting a first time director and agreeing to star in the film.
9. What is your next project?
My next project is a supernatural thriller I've written called Evilseek that will star Thomas Jane as Satan. The Weinstein Co. is financing. The pitch is: Every thousand years in hell they elect a new Satan. The reigning Satan has to come down to earth and takes over the body of a mortal to find his successor, the most evil person alive. Satan takes over the body of an FBI profiler who has just blown his brains out while working the worst serial killer case in LA. He's also inherited the agent's disgruntled ex-wife, promiscuous 15-year-old daughter and a bossy lesbian partner. And it turns out that the killer (or killers) is trying to summon the devil through his/her actions. Basically, Satan joins the FBI.
10. What is the one project that you've always wanted to do, but have yet to be able to?
I'm working on a big multi-character canvas that deals with immigration. Within the fabric of the story is a murder investigation, a ghost story, a doomed romance and a bunch of other neat storylines. I'm still writing it and have been researching it for years. I think I'll have finally have the script done by the end of the year. I'm also trying to get my project The Sleeping Detective into production. It's about a narcoleptic private eye in a very Chandleresque thriller a la Chinatown. Fans of The Cooler with probably enjoy that one, as it's more of a quirky character piece set against a private eye template. I've been flirting with Bruce Willis on that, but I think he feels my stuff is too violent. But I really dig him as an actor, so I'm hoping he decides to do it.
I haven't seen Running Scared, i loved the Cooler...and after reading that interview i like this guy
Quote from: MacGuffin on March 06, 2006, 10:18:14 PM7. If you could change one thing about the industry, what would it be?
Just one thing? How about two: dump the PG-13 rating. It's (expletive) the R rating in the (expletive).
"It's
fucking the R rating in the
ass."
any others?
It was sooo much fun to watch. The production design and the cimentography were out of control awseome.
Quote from: musse on March 03, 2006, 01:13:33 PM
I just saw this the other night, and overall, a really entertaining piece (like most of the people who replied here).
The only thing that bugged me I would say were the credits (intro & outro), they did not fit the theme of the movie at all. So it seemed out of place... I guess you could say that about plenty of sequences in this thing!?
i loved the end credits animations. it was like a new perspective on the movie and an interesting one. i totally dig the idea that the movie's more about the kid than about paul walker.
and yeah, one more opinion to say it was very cool, with a bunch of great scenes (the opening one, the sick couple, the hockey stadium...) and great energy.
I know this was printed a month ago but damn i just found it and it made me laugh:
PAUL WALKER FUCKED THOSE SLED DOGS
March 5th
from pattonoswalt.com
I saw RUNNING SCARED last week. Although I don't exactly feel like I "saw" it. I feel like it yelled at me for two hours and then crushed my balls with a can of baked beans.
Is it playing near you? Better run out and see it. 'Cuz it ain't gonna be playing much longer. RUNNING SCARED, as a film, feels like it was written by the idea of anal trauma, filmed by un-lubed rape, and directed by the smell of a pedo-priest's death poo.
Have I mentioned I loved it?
I really envy Paul Walker. I never felt either way about him as an actor, but holy shit! Being in EIGHT BELOW and RUNNING SCARED in the same week is like starring in BABE and AUDITION at the same time. Nothing like having range forced on you with a meat tenderizer.
Wayne Kramer: Part One - What Went Wrong with Running Scared
Source: Now Playing Magazine
When writer-director Wayne Kramer's Running Scared hit theaters last winter, a lot of film fans were hoping for big things from the movie, a visceral and non-stop thrill-ride through the criminal underworld as seen through the eyes of Paul Walker's mobster underling. But aside from a controversial online videogame marketing tie-in, the film generated little press and even less box office. The film hits DVD today, so Now Playing sat down with Kramer recently to discuss what went wrong – and what went right – with Running Scared.
Now Playing: Wayne, the marketing on the film when it went theatrical was kind of interesting... It seemed that the thing that got more attention than anything was that videogame that they did.
Wayne Kramer: Aside from the Internet marketing, there was no outdoor campaign at all. So, there was nothing to reinforce the occasional TV commercial that came on. It seemed like they did a lot on cable. And most people who I meet, and I ask about the film, had no idea it was out. Or, if they did, they had heard something about the videogame. I wouldn't put all of it on New Line's theatrical department, but to really show the intensity of the film is hard to get by the MPAA, especially TV. They wasted a lot of money on a Super Bowl commercial where ABC just beat them down constantly, so they couldn't show anything. And I'm not sure the approach that was taken was best, to just show a little bit of the shootout in the hotel room and nothing more about the movie.
NP: It's the studios in general, not just New Line, where there's certain kinds of set patterns that they follow. Maybe it needed some more thinking outside the box.
WK: It really did. It really also needed more of, I guess a commitment to get it out there. This film was very much a political cinderblock within the company because there was a group of people who did not want to see this movie released by New Line because they were morally offended by it. And then there were the people who brought this movie into New Line and there were strong supporters. And it was almost like a civil war within the company. And that's never good for a film, to have such polarized camps when they're supposed to be out there supporting the film. Instead of being told that they have to do this. And I think at the end of the day it was, "Let's dip our toe in the water; see if this thing ignites a bit, and then we'll all support it or we'll abandon it."
NP: I guess they abandoned it is what happened.
WK: Yeah. I don't track it too much 'cause it's a little painful. But when I have checked out the IMDb, a lot of the response is mainly positive. I think it rates between 6.9 and 7 right now, which I think is above average for IMDb. So it's definitely not a film that deserved such a weak opening, in terms of what the reaction to the film is. It's really difficult for me to try to deconstruct what happened because we had really high preview audiences, preview tests. I mean among young males we scored at 90-percent. And young females was high, too. I mean it was way above average. In fact the whole score was way above average. And then, even on the first weekend when they take the exit poles, we were at about 85-percent.
NP: But it still seemed to just lose the studio's support after that first weekend.
WK: Yeah. Because the crazy thing is for a movie that they considered was gonna be a word of mouth film, they followed up in the second week with no advertising whatsoever. It was all TV spots. It's weird. It's a painful process 'cause we really killed ourselves to make a good film. We struggled; we pushed the envelope; I mean every day was a battle to make that film. And it was a battle to keep the contents. And I, as a director, did not want to even screw the audience out of seeing like - in terms of the unrated cuts and all this, I wanted to get all that in the theatrical experience so that the audience didn't feel gypped. And I was able to get the exact film I wanted rated R; and I know the DVD market loves, "Oh, it's an unrated cut; or it's a new director's cut and all that," But this is the film. There was no more provocative footage to go and find.
NP: So the cut we'll see on disc is the same cut that was in theaters?
WK: Yeah. And that's because I was so mindful of protecting that cut through the whole process, and hoping that the audience would turn up in the theater and want to see a hard, R-rated film as opposed to this PG-13, watered down crap that they're constantly fed, in terms of the action or thriller genre. And really, I mean, pretty much nobody showed up.
NP: Did you fight with the MPAA at all on the cut?
WK: No. What happens is - and I was encouraged, 'cause I had had a bad experience with them on The Cooler - but I was encouraged to show it to them early. And see where the problem points where. And it turned out that they were not issues that were gonna affect the film. I mean I probably subconsciously cut in more than I wanted. The cut wasn't refined. And they pointed out a little bit; a little bit there, but there wasn't stuff that I wasn't gonna trim myself, anyway. I mean, you would look at that film and you would think, "Man, they were probably lucky to get an R."
NP: It's a heavy picture at times. But, nowadays it seems so arbitrary what they want.
WK: It is kind of arbitrary. I guess they have their little rules. And I was surprised with some of the things that they gave a pass to in the film. I mean full frontal strippers, and all that kind of stuff. It truly is - I mean I think on any other day, had I submitted the film and maybe they got up and had a grouchier morning, I could've gotten an NC-17.
NP: To get back to the film not opening strong, at what point do you realize that it hasn't and that the studio isn't supporting it anymore? Is it like Saturday morning you get numbers in and you know?
WK: You know Friday night when you go check out a couple of theaters and they're practically empty.
NP: You'll do that? You'll actually go to a theater?
WK: Yeah. I mean I went to the Cinerama Dome, which is not a good theater to test it by, because it's so huge, but still it's a movie with an exciting interest and you would at least fill half of it. And I think it was just me and a couple of my friends. I think that out of an 800-seat theater, I'd say there were maybe 200 people there. That's Friday night, the opening night of the film. So, I got a sense pretty quickly. The tracking was low on the film also going in, so we knew there were issues. I think another problem - I think Paul Walker is fantastic in the film. And I think he really has serious potential as an actor, but I think there's a perception with him, with the young action crowd, that he's not a tough guy. Or for some reason, they think he's not a good actor. And I think these are all misconceptions, but I don't think they were willing to turn up and support the movie with him, as if it were something that say opened with Brad Pitt or Colin Farrell, or someone like that.
NP: Yeah, and he's great in it, too.
WK: It's too bad. And I think it was a perception that the marketing should've tried to get over; cut more spots that featured him in more performance-based moments. And I think critics are the same way. They're not willing to cut him a break. I don't know whether it's because their girlfriends all talk about wanting to fuck the guy.
NP: It's probably part of that. And for some it might be because they don't even have girlfriends!
WK: And all these factors, which sort of come together and - I have to say I do feel I was blindsided by the critical negativity and the lack of box office. And I don't feel like I'm a guy who has tunnel vision about what I've done. I felt like there was solid craft in the film; I feel like we pushed the envelope; we tried to tell like a real, intense provocative story. I mean that movie was only made for about $15 million, but since we had to shoot a lot of it in Prague, we got more production value. I thought we had good actors in the film. I knew it wouldn't appeal to everybody and I knew if you weren't into violent films or that genre of film, you were not gonna probably love it. But, I'd like to feel like the fans of guys like Tarantino or De Palma in his heyday or Walter Hill would have a good time at this film.
NP: Also, on the topic of Paul, I guess it was just completely coincidence but it was sort of counter-programmed by that dog movie Eight Below that also starred him and was released like the week before.
WK: It's hard to tell, because with Eight Below it's the Disney brand, so parents and families are gonna trust that. But it does amaze me that a movie like Ultraviolet, which wasn't even screened for critics 'cause they knew ahead of time - the testing from what I heard had been really bad and everything. And people's perception of the movie was "This was going to be really a weak film." And I haven't seen it. So, I'm only just talking about what I'm kind of reading about it, but yet, they can manage to open that movie to significant numbers on opening weekend.
NP: What did Running Scared open against again?
WK: It opened against a movie which should never really have caused any competition, although I guess there was some bleed-off from urban audiences, which was Madea's Family Reunion. But I think that movie has just like got its base.
NP: That's an Oprah movie.
WK: Yeah. I mean that's a movie that's got a hardcore base that was gonna' see it regardless. Funny thing is that movie made like $30 million on opening weekend and I think it's like, if you check it out on IMDb, it's like in the 100 worst rated movies of all time. So, there's no connection between what a movie makes at the box office and what is the perceived quality of a film. I mean I tend to make movies that polarize people; I sort of felt like The Cooler was received better critically, but still very polarizing. People either loved it or hated it. And I don't think there's any middle ground on Running Scared. I don't think anybody's gonna say, "Well, it was okay." They're either gonna say it's a really cool movie or it sucks completely.
NP: What do you do then on opening night and you see there wasn't a turnout? It's got to be a big time bummer. How do you cope?
WK: I am a person that even though maybe three people turned up to see the film, I still believe in it. I still really feel like I achieved what I set out to achieve with that film. And Paul Walker was with me and a couple of friends and other cast members and we walked out afterwards and we said, "You know?" My cinematographer was with me. I said, "We really dig the film." I'm not one of those filmmakers who finds it difficult to watch his movie - I'm in this because I want to make what I want to see. And we stand by the film. And to be honest, I'm confounded by why we couldn't attract a bigger audience, even with poor marketing. There was this movie that opened recently called Stay Alive that did like what, $12 or $13 million? I never saw a single trailer or marketing on that film. I guess the horror genre is just really faithful.
NP: With the horror genre you're getting probably a younger crowd as well.
WK: Those movies are a lot of the PG-13s, so I guess the kids are being kept out of Running Scared or buying tickets to other movies to go see it. But then, like The Inside Man can open to $30 million, too, which is R-rated like. It has movie stars in it though too, big movie stars. You can bang your head against the wall. I, at the end of the day, to go back to the question you asked: How do I deal with it? I feel it's just one of those movies that people are gonna - That the marketing did not create an appealing image of what the film was, whether it be the trailers or posters, or whatever it was. People felt like this wasn't something they needed to go see. Now, hopefully when they do see it, they'll go, "Wow! We really misjudged this film," Or, "It's a lot better than I was led to believe." We had some good reviews. I don't mean to say every critic hated the film. We had like Roger Ebert, and Quentin Tarantino's a big fan of the film and really comes out strongly for it; and Andrew Sarris and guys like Mick LaSalle. But if you check out a site like Rotten Tomatoes - I kind of have mixed feelings about that site because every Internet jerk with a website gets to play film critic. And usually it attracts the more elitist, snobbish sites that I just despise like Slant.com. Have you ever seen those guys? I mean they hate movies.
NP: Yeah.
WK: And you can print that, too. Please.
NP: I will!
WK: Even take the top critics; put them on a set and ask them where they would put the camera. I don't think these guys would fare very well, but that's not their role. I mean they have taken the role, and they're to be film critics. But a lot of times as critics, they're not really reviewing a film for an audience. They're reviewing it in a way with their own prejudices. I mean when you're reviewing an action film or a horror film, you really should be trying to communicate to that audience whether they would like to see it or not. Because obviously a critic is gonna have a lot of personal biases against material, and a lot of these critics are guys that are like 50-years-old and plus. They're not the demographic of the film. I mean I cannot believe - You know I didn't want this to sound like sour grapes or anything, but we had in LA - are you in LA?
NP: No, I'm in New York.
WK: Right. We had a woman from the LA Times who just came out against this film. And in the opening lines of her review she said, "I'm pretty sure this is gonna be the worst movie of 2006." And then preceded to just like tear apart everything. Never mentioning any of the craft that went into the film; any of the performance; just because it offended her, whatever her moral sensibility was. And that's going in one of the biggest newspapers in the country and that's on record and that's what people read. And you feel like this woman did no service to audience members out there. It's actually, when you think about critics or a single person who writes under the banner of a big national newspaper, its one person's point of view, and yet, it gets printed or reprinted as the voice of an entire newspaper. Where I'm pretty sure there were some other critics or staff who would probably have liked the film.
NP: Right. My home town, out in suburban New York, people always will just say, "Oh, so-and-so film got two stars," or whatever. And they'll just be referring to like what they read in the local paper; one person's review, one person's opinion.
WK: I can't tell you how many negatively reviewed movies that I've seen that I go, "What were the critics talking about? I thought this thing was fantastic?" Whether it be something recently like Man on Fire. Remember a lot of critics came out against that film? And I thought it was really good. Or, I remember when Scarface came out; Brian De Palma got a Golden Raspberry nomination. All the critics hated that movie, but if you go on Rotten Tomatoes, it's all the revisionist reviews. Also like Heat when it first came out, the reviews were very mixed and different. Now that's considered a classic. I remember another movie, State of Grace, which I think is a terrific movie; nobody even noticed that film when it came out. A movie like Madea's can get terrible reviews when it's reviewed the Monday morning afterwards, but it's got a $30 million box office to crow about. Or The Pink Panther or whatever. But, we got like a lot of negative reviews; nobody turned up to see the movie, and you sit in the aftermath of that and go, "God, this just doesn't feel right." Not in terms of what you're owed by anybody, but just like, "Where's the audience for this movie 'cause there's got to be an audience for this movie?"
NP: Well, maybe it's on DVD. Maybe it's just symptomatic of what's going on with theatricals in general.
WK: Without even naming names, besides - I mean I mentioned Tarantino, but I get calls from people in the industry all the time, saying, "What the hell were the critics talking about? We love your movie." You know, big stars, big producers, heads of studios.
NP: There's a group mentality though with the critics. A guy like Ebert or Sarris or someone, they're kind of one-offs, but the bigger pool of critics, there's a herd mentality very often.
WK: I think so. And you know when we go and do the round tables, there'll be a lot of online guys. You just know they're blowing smoke in your face a lot of the time. And I mean the biggest fans of the movie, ironically, have been the sort of, you know, like the websites like Chud and JoBlo and Ain't It Cool's Harry Knowles liked the film a lot. I mean it's those guys who really are the heartbeat of the genre or the people who love these kind of movies, and really appreciated it. And I just think, as a film, it's just - I don't know. It's got a very modern style to it, too. And it's just things that traditional critics are just not in step with.
NP: We're speaking in general terms here, but like a 55-year-old woman film critic who's a mom or something, she sits down to watch your movie and she probably can't even follow it half the time. So, maybe that's part of it.
WK: I think women who have become mothers, although again, we're generalizing, look at the film and go, "Well, this is very irresponsible," because they're thinking about the kid, the real kid being put in this environment. And it's sort of clouding their view of enjoying the movie and they're not seeing the film is not just a celebration of violence. But it's also a cautionary tale in terms of what guns do to society and irresponsible parenting, and the fact that there's like a Grimm's fairy tale concept built in there. There's a lot of things in there that I'm just kind of astounded as a filmmaker 'cause I didn't try to be pretentious about it, but I'm just - that stuff never gets into the dialogue. It's like the first thing out of some detractors' minds is this movie is ludicrous or it's this or it's that, as opposed to anything else like Mission: Impossible or anything else. Right?
NP: True.
WK: I mean you're not going into a movie like Running Scared and expecting to see cinéma vérité, or you're not seeing Mean Streets.
Wayne Kramer: Part Two - Running Scared, Evil Seek, and Beyond
We continue our chat with writer-director Wayne Kramer as his film Running Scared hits DVD today.
Now Playing: Can you talk a little bit about the fairy tale aspect of the film, Wayne? Did you envision it as being sort of a modern fairy tale from the start?
Wayne Kramer: I think it was there subconsciously while I was writing it and then in the early stages of prep - Usually what I do is I'll break down my scripts and I'll storyboard them myself. And I'll also start engaging in talks with the production designer and the cinematographer and costume designer. And I just started to realize - It just felt to me, what I had, was a Grimm's fairy tale template, in that it's a little boy who's on the run, or lost in the dark woods. But the dark woods is this sort of urban environment; the city and all these freakish characters that he encounters through the night just felt like they were out of a Grimm's fairy tale. When he bumps into this sort of sadistic, over the top pimp, it's like the Mad Hatter. Some of the criticisms about that guy was like he was a joke. Well, that's exactly what the point was. It was like a clueless white guy who's acting the way he thinks a pimp acts. Or, the kid gets abducted by the pedophiles and taken to that apartment, which is like the Hansel and Gretel house; and that couple, we depict them as being like witch Nosferatu-like figures, from the kid's point of view, in the bathroom. And I always saw the boy himself as like a little Pinocchio kid who's trying to get home and become a real boy. And he covets the house next door, the family, where he sees his friend lives, because he feels like that kid gets treated like a real kid.
NP: Right.
WK: And so there's all these sort of things that became clear to me, like the hooker who takes the little boy under his wing. She's like the blue fairy. She's a force of goodness. The one thing I wanted to do was make sure that even if audiences never picked up on that, it wouldn't affect their enjoyment of the film. They would just see it as a sort of adrenaline filled mob thriller. But, if you do; if you are looking deeper there's a lot of little references, jokes buried in there and touches, even from the kid having the red shoes. A little bit of The Wizard of Oz thing. There's a lot of detail in the production design where we were always conscious of that theme. A lot of names - the ice cream café is called the Cheshire Café and the one hotel where they're waiting for the pimp to come out is called the Royal Towers; all these things. If you go back through the movie, you can have a good time thinking it out and see that it was a conscious effort on our part to just have it there on the periphery.
NP: And the kid even kind of looks like a Pinocchio.
WK: Yeah. He's a very haunted kid. I mean when you go back and read those Grimm's fairy tales, they're very scary. A lot of them talk about subtle child abuse. Not even subtle; I mean I think Hansel and Gretel was a Grimm's fairy tale. I'm not quite sure sometimes which are Grimm's and which aren't. But you know the wicked witch who wants to eat these kids? And they end up shoving her in an oven?
NP: Yeah. It's horrendous.
WK: I mean all that is like really creepy stuff; following bread crumbs through the forest, or even if you go back to like Sleeping Beauty and "Mirror, mirror on the wall." And sending the woodsman out to kill the - was it Snow White? I mean they really talk - you don't think of these classic children's fairy tales as taking place in the world of light.
NP: They've all been sanitized by Disney now.
WK: Yeah, but even the Disney version of Snow White freaks kids out... So, I just felt that was interesting. And in a way, The Cooler was also played for a lot of magic realism, kind of a Las Vegas fairy tale, in a way. And I never thought consciously to connect the two, but when I've spoken to some journalists about it, I see that there are - both films have subtle fairy tale imagery going through them.
NP: With the film hitting disc, are you actively trying to promote it?
WK: The Cooler actually didn't do much better than Running Scared in movie theaters. I think it only did about $8 million. And so the real audience discovered that film on DVD; I think just in DVD rentals alone it did more than $50 million. So, it was a real anomaly compared to its theatrical. I always thought that Running Scared would do a lot more than The Cooler since it was more the action genre. I mean The Cooler was positioned as an art film. I am hoping audiences find the film. I mean a lot of people are predicting it to be like a cult action hit, and I hope so. I would be lying if I said I was brutally disappointed that people didn't turn up and support it, and just support this genre of film, which is the R-rated action thriller which has been gone for a long time and is not likely to come back any time soon.
NP: If no one goes to see them...
WK: I mean that's the thing; people complain all the time about PG-13 and it's watered down and all that. And they get a movie that is a throwback to the kind of movies that I remember seeing in the '70s and '80s and nobody turns up. And I felt I did my part; I felt I gave them something educating and different and edgy and all that. So, I do hope they discover it on DVD and I mean I often am just as guilty where I'll bypass a film because maybe I haven't heard enough about it, or it maybe seems out of the genre of something I really like. But I'll just buy it on DVD and I'll be like stunned at how something was really good that I overlooked.
NP: There's an audio commentary on the DVD. Is that something you enjoy doing?
WK: I actually enjoyed doing it, although sometimes you question whether you want audiences to discover things for themselves without being sort of coached along. But, I do feel a responsibility to younger audiences who want to learn about how you did something, to share with them the techniques or the thought processes you had about the film. Because somebody like me, before I was making films or when I was younger - a slightly older teenager, would've loved that stuff. I think some filmmakers want to keep all their magic behind the curtain, which is pretentious in the first place, because you can find out about it anywhere, anyway today. I think they're trying to protect - sort of create a mystique, or take the David Lynch approach which is, "Well, you figure it out." I do think a film should have a point of view. And I do think the director should know what he's talking about and should be clear about what he's trying to communicate. And so I think the commentaries are really helpful to people who are interested in the film, or want to go deeper into the film and what the filmmaker was thinking.
NP: If done right, DVDs can serve as a mini-film school - if you pick the right ones and listen to the right commentaries. You can really learn a lot.
WK: Absolutely! Essentially my film school was watching films, but that was just watching the film. And today, if you can hear the director take you through the film - and I'm always watching a film and going, "Well, how did he execute that shot?" - and hear the director say, "Well, we were on a Technocrane, or this is Steadicam and then we got pulled through the ceiling." Those are great things for a filmmaker to learn and go, "Wow! You can do it that way?" Or, talking about some of the subtexts or talking about the lighting. I don't have time to listen to a lot of DVD commentaries, but when a movie is - when I've been a fan of a movie, I will certainly listen to the commentary and want to hear the director's point of view on that.
NP: And some are misses. Some are great; some aren't so interesting.
WK: I never really thought about it, commentaries been rated by people. But I noticed the other day, somebody created a website just to rate DVD commentaries.
NP: That's a good idea, actually.
WK: Running Scared was a very tough commentary to do because the movie moves so fast. And I wasn't expecting it; so, as soon as I'm sitting down to talk about - like I wanted to talk a little bit about what the thought processes were behind what an actor was doing; or, I wanted to talk about how we executed that particular camera move; or, the controversy of a particular scene, the next thing I know the scene's over and it's on to something else. So, I think what audiences will find when they listen to my commentary is I'm speaking like 100 miles an hour, for two hours. I actually did it the Monday after the movie opened, so I was in a really good state of mind.
NP: Is that really when you did it?
WK: That is when I did it. I'm not somebody who's too deeply affected by what happens. I mean obviously I'm bummed out about it, but I believe in my film and that's not going to stop me from going in and being enthusiastic about it.
NP: Did you talk about that at all, the opening?
WK: I don't think I addressed the box office as much as I addressed where I felt people had talked about certain points about the film and felt like this didn't ring true, or this didn't ring true. And it was me trying to justify it. I know the ending gets talked about a lot. And I tried to address that on the commentary track why I thought the ending should've been the ending that I had. And I think for fans of the movie, or fans of the movie but people who don't like the ending, I think it's interesting to at least hear it from the horse's mouth.
NP: A lot of times they do the commentaries before the movie's even out.
WK: Typically that is the case, 'cause they want to get the filmmaker while it's all fresh in his head. Yeah. I mean the commentaries are - The Cooler was weird because it was I think like a year on the festival circuit before it even opened, so we had done the commentaries and all that stuff. We didn't do it on this one, but we did an isolated score on The Cooler. For two reasons. On The Cooler I wasn't happy with the CD release. I didn't feel they included enough of the score tracks and some of the good score tracks from the release. But on the soundtrack for Running Scared we really got a healthy 72-minute long score CD, which maybe about only 20 minutes didn't make it onto the CD. So I felt like the CD really did represent the best part of the score, whereas it didn't on The Cooler. And then also, I guess the more you put on the DVD, it sort of lowers the bit rate on the movie. And so I really wanted the movie to look good.
NP: And then it becomes a money issue if New Line has to go to a two-disc set.
WK: Yeah. I mean, it's got a commentary. They cut together a documentary. It's about 20 minutes long and I thought it was pretty good. It wasn't your typical sort of puff piece. It actually - they interviewed me and a couple of cast members, and I do talk about like particular camera moves and things. I thought it was quite informative, actually. And I think fans of the movie will kind of dig that. I haven't seen them, yet, but they've got two storyboard comparisons for both the action sequences; the hotel shootout and the ice rink. And I drew those storyboards myself.
NP: That's pretty rare, isn't it?
WK: Whether you like the art or not, you can at least see that this is the thought process that went into crafting those sequences.
NP: That's rare, though, isn't it, for the filmmaker himself to do his own storyboards?
WK: Yeah. It is rare. I like to do it because there's an immediacy to it which is I'm coming up with the shots. I'm not handing a script over to storyboard artists and having them direct the movie for me. And my drawings aren't like on the level of a great artist, but I think people can see them clear enough to know that's a guy walking and he's coming through a door and he's doing this and he's doing that.
NP: I never really understood that, why directors or filmmakers would have other people storyboard them.
WK: I think probably the biggest reason is it takes an enormous amount of time to do it. And I do feel a filmmaker should do it that way. I mean even if he uses stick figures. I do feel the initial shots should come from his head and not the other way around, which you'll be surprised how often that happens.
NP: So, it's the storyboard artist who's actually composing the shot?
WK: Yeah. I can name you so many big directors who get the big studio gigs and when I talk to the storyboard artists who work with them, they say, "Hey! They give me a script and I come back with a storyboard." And the director might say, "Well, I don't like that or do this or do that." But I'd say 85-percent of those shots are coming from storyboard artists.
NP: Wow! That's depressing.
WK: I'm not saying that this is all directors, because I know Tony Scott draws his own boards. And I can't imagine David Fincher letting storyboard artists dictate shots to him, but it takes a lot of time to sit down and break your movie down. In terms of the old school, Hitchcock kind of craft of what my camera's going to do exactly in this moment; and what it's going to cut to; and what it's gonna transition to - I know so many directors who just turn up on the day and lock the scene right then and there. And if they come up with an inspired idea, they're shit out of luck because they can't get a Technocrane or they can't get this or they can't get that. For me, it takes about four to five months to break that script down into shots. And so I'm not some director who's probably gonna be able to do two movies back-to-back. And I write, as well. So, I need to find time to write those new screenplays.
NP: Speaking of which, what are you working on now?
WK: I'm going to start a movie in September that I wrote and I'll be directing for the Weinstein Co. called Evil Seek. And it's basically every 1000 years in hell, they elect a new Satan, so the reigning Satan has to come down to Earth, take over the body of a mortal and find his successor, the most evil person alive. And he wakes up in the body of an FBI profiler working a terrible serial killing case in LA. And it's kind of like Seven meets Heaven Can Wait. And sort of like Satan is the one moral guy in this film. And he has inherited a disgruntled ex-wife, a 15-year-old daughter who's becoming all promiscuous, a lesbian partner. And he's got no powers, just a nose for evil. And it turns out that when he starts investigating these bizarre killings, it looks like the killer's trying to summon the devil, so it's kind of an interesting thing that's about to happen.
NP: What genre does it fall into?
WK: It's basically a supernatural thriller. There is humor in it and I think it's great to write a film about finding the ultimate evil, because you can comment on everything that's happening politically today, as well. But it's also very disturbing and freakish. It's definitely one that's gonna challenge the MPAA, I'll tell you that. Thomas Jane is starring. Thomas is a great actor. That's another movie that came out and nobody saw which was fantastic - Stander. Thomas did a really like '70s exploitation kind of film where he played a South African bank robber.
NP: And then what are you doing beyond Evil Seek?
WK: I have a couple of projects that I've written set-up around town. One of them is The Sleeping Detective which is at New Line, about a narcoleptic private eye. It's kind of a Chinatown - a guy like Jake Gittes who is falling asleep all the time, at the worst possible times. Probably I'm working also on an immigration drama that's gonna be a very different film, which is sort of like a passion project for me. And I've been researching it for a bunch of years, but I'm just trying to find the time to finish the script.
NP: You jump around in genres.
WK: I might jump around in genres, but I think when people see my films the tones are very similar. They're very provocative, or they're not afraid - there's strong sexuality in them, strong violence. I'm not afraid to mix up a little bit of the genre. A lot of people seem to remember The Cooler as being quite comedic. But, that was really more of a character drama. I do think it's important actually for a filmmaker to brand themselves. And when people see my films, I do want them to go, "Okay. This is a Wayne Kramer film and we know it's gonna be a bit in your face, or it's not gonna be a smooth ride. We're gonna kind of be carrying our seats at times." And I don't think I'm the kind of guy who's gonna go and do an out and out comedy, or family movies or stuff like that. I'm very much more into intense dramas, thrillers. Evil Seek will be the first time I've done something on a supernatural level.
NP: But it sounds like you might fit some humor into that too.
WK: Yeah. There's definitely a lot of dark humor in the script, even though at times it'll be absolutely terrifying and freakish. And I don't know - there's definitely enough fairy tale aspects to it, but there's a lot of twists and turns. I think most of the films that I've done feature certain sort of turnarounds in the storyline and I do think fans of the horror genre are going to have a fun time with this one.
NP: Well, cool. Thanks very much, Wayne.
WK: Thank you.
"It makes kill bill look like sesame street"
That's what it said on the DVD commercial...what does that even mean?
Quote from: Neil on June 09, 2006, 02:42:01 PM
"It makes kill bill look like sesame street"
That's what it said on the DVD commercial...what does that even mean?
:brickwall:
Just saw it, great cinematography. Now I want to see The Cooler.
Quote from: McfLy on June 09, 2006, 03:59:11 PM
Just saw it, great cinematography. Now I want to see The Cooler.
If you didn't know already, you'd have no idea they're by the same guy.
:shock:
Holy Crap! This had everything AND the kitchen sink. It was like a strange blend of 8 MM and After Hours, with a dash of Narc. There was so much going on that it's relentlessness has to be admired. It's style easily puts it in the cult classic catagory.
All these posts and not one mention of Brett Ratner as a producer?
Quote from: MacGuffin on June 09, 2006, 06:33:40 PM
All these posts and not one mention of Brett Ratner as a producer?
I must have blinked at that part.
agree with everyone. :yabbse-thumbup:
holy shit! what a knockout, visually badass, chilling-to-the-bone movie! how come no one is seeing this?
i don't know if it really does "make kill bill look like sesame street" but it sure as hell is more thrilling. and i can't remember the last scene that made the two hairs on the back of my neck stand up as much as the pedophile sequence.
SEE. IT. NOW.
I'm the lame guy here, and I'll say, i agree with what everyone is saying (as far as the positive comments go) and i really enjoyed it...the pedophile sequence made me sick to my stomach...good stuff, it just kept getting crazier and crazier...
What am I missing here?
This has like three good scenes and the rest is a bunch of boring shit with a terribly annoying score.
So extremely predictable (with the exception of the children scene, which was cool... I liked that part) and I couldn't have given half a fuck about one character in the whole movie.
I think Xixax has ruined another one for me because if I had just seen this I would have said "jeepers, that wasn't as horrible as I thought it was going to be". Instead I hear about what a "thrill ride" it is and then almost fall asleep during a few parts.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi5.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy154%2Fpubrick%2Fsimps%2Ffg_138.jpg&hash=b1f2d2a3736879f1eff2180335b9b398d6b1b493)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi5.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy154%2Fpubrick%2Fsimps%2Ffg_139.jpg&hash=57156813c6e395e43413fc7fbb733cafcf5219f6)
angry, angry young man.