When a film is referred to as a ‘cult classic’ it clearly only appeals to a certain audience. In the horror genre the slasher film is a sacred piece of work, which in recent years hasn’t been given the justice it deserves. It's an audience participation genre that invites you to scream at the screen. Done properly it pulls no punches. Hollywood studios normally like to bet on a ‘sure thing’ and the safe option, and when it comes to the horror genre they love to remake classics for the modern audience. A recent example of this is Prom Night, which was by no means a classic back in its day but was a fun-ride which didn’t take itself too seriously. The 2008 re-working was scare-free, dull as dishwater and a damp squib.
As 2009 is fast approaching another ‘cult classic’ is vying for our attention: My Bloody Valentine 3D. Writer Todd Farmer is the man responsible for taking a stab at this new reworking but, as he tells Eye For Film, this film is no re-hash. It’s a step in the right direction in allowing audiences to turn up and be entertained. It probably won’t win any Oscars but it sounds like it will be one hell of a rollercoaster ride filled with the essential ingredients: blood, guts and gore.
Darren Amner: Hollywood film studios lately seem to be fascinated by remaking films, especially within the horror genre. Why do you think this is the case?
Todd Farmer: I wish they were fascinated with remaking films. But there’s not that much passion involved. It’s just a numbers game, a statistical probability. I grew up with remakes. The Thing. The Fly. Loved them. But back in those days you remade a film because you had a cool way to update or retell the original concept. These days remakes come to you because they offer slightly less risk. It’s all about name recognition. With a remake you get a head start on the marketing because your name will ring a bell with ticket buyers. The hard reality is that Hollywood is no longer a bunch of wealthy upper class artists wanting to make great movies. Hollywood is now an accounting entry on a conglomerate’s spreadsheet. That changes the rules.
For the screenwriter it presents a whole new set of challenges. If you want to eat, you have to play. For me the only way to play is to follow in the footsteps of our forefathers. Fortunately there are a lot of remake options out there so you simply choose those that could actually benefit from a remake.
DA: From the crop of remakes that have surfaced over the last few years which films if any do you think were worthy rediscoveries?
TF: In a pure world you remake a film for one of two reasons. One, for the same reason Carpenter remade The Thing or Cronenberg remade The Fly - because you have a great new take on the original concept. Two, because the original was a great concept that could either be enhanced or improved upon with a bigger budget and/or better technology. Any previous remake that fits within one of those, at least in my book, is worthy.
DA: Slasher films have always been good draws at the box-office especially during the Eighties. Why do you think this type of horror film has such an appeal to audiences?
TF: I have no idea but I have spent years being intrigued by the question. I think with anything, if it’s good people will find it. I love that the horror lake has so many rivers branching out from it. Monster movies, ghost stories - the list goes on. As for the slasher, we have the Godfathers to thank. Halloween was a shark above water. Friday The 13th brought us over-the-top and irreverent with a bit of who-done-it. Freddy took us into the realm of fantasy. Those three are icons. Like it or not. Their fans are as rabid as any professional sports team’s. I’ve always said there are three constants in life: Death; taxes; and Freddy, Michael and Jason will always come back.
DA: My Bloody Valentine is a remake of a Canadian 1981 slasher film, which is soon to be released in 2009. Why does this particular film need to be remade now?
TF: The original MBV is pretty unique in that it’s a real story dipped in slasher. There’s this very interesting, mature-themed love triangle that most slasher movies wouldn’t touch with a ten food machete. The original characters aren’t teens. They’re adults. That’s pretty much unheard of in a slasher. So you have this great iconic killer, you have these claustrophobic mine settings and intriguing characters all wrapped within a movie shot for 23 dollars and a box of Canadian smokes. MBV is one of those movies that would benefit from bigger budget and better technology. We even had a new take on the original concept. It’s actually the perfect remake.
DA: Please could you tell the uninitiated what My Bloody Valentine is about and how this new version differs from the 1981 original film?
TF: Ten years ago, a tragedy changed the town of Harmony forever. Tom Hanniger, an inexperienced coal miner, caused an accident in the tunnels that trapped and killed five men and sent the only survivor, Harry Warden, into a permanent coma. But Harry Warden wanted revenge. Exactly one year later, on Valentine's Day, he woke up... and brutally murdered 22 people with a pick axe before being killed.
Ten years later, Tom Hanniger returns to Harmony on Valentine's Day, still haunted by the deaths he caused. Struggling to make amends with his past, he grapples with unresolved feelings for his ex-girlfriend, Sarah, who is now married to his best friend, Axel, the town sheriff. But tonight, after years of peace, something from Harmony's dark past has returned. Wearing a miner's mask and armed with a pickaxe, an unstoppable killer is on the loose. And as his footsteps come ever closer, Tom, Sarah and Axel realize in terror that it just might be Harry Warden who's come back to claim them...
If you haven’t seen the original then go pick up copy. In fact, I think there’s a shiny new version with lots of deleted joy.
As for how we’re different, as a word guy I’m deathly allergic to spoilers.
DA: I must say from seeing some of the artwork and also the trailer, the film looks pretty cool. From doing a bit of research on the internet the general consensus about the new film seems very positive – so far so good?
TF: I’ve been doing horror since 1996. This is the first time I’ve been really proud of the finished product. We hit some obstacles, as all movies do, but somehow we overcame each and showed up stronger on the other side. The crew was simply perfect. The cast made me look like a better writer. The director is the best kept secret in horror.
DA: I think Patrick Lussier is a great visual artist; I really enjoyed his Dracula Trilogy. How important is it to this movie having him at the helm?
TF: Remove Patrick from this project and this movie tanks. The cast, the crew, all fantastic. Even the writing was pretty great. But every movie I’ve ever been involved with has taken one if not several giant steps backwards during the development process. It happens for several hundred different reasons, all as unpredictable as the next. One huge factor is that people read the script so much they get “used” to it. So “used” to it that in the 11th hour they forget what was so great about it in the first place and start taking knifes and axes and wood chippers to it.
Sometimes those back steps are fixable. Sometimes the whole movie derails. There was a time during the process when MBV3D derailed. The movie came off the tracks. It was going to crash and burn. I knew it, the DP knew it, the producer, most of the cast… I remember feeling sucker punched. Because I’ve seen it happen before. I had hoped it wouldn’t happen this time. But it did. And then something remarkable happened. Patrick Lussier leapt in front of the train, ran along side and lifted the sumbitch back onto the tracks. I’ve never seen anything like it. If you understand how the movie business works then you will understand what he did really is that miraculous.
DA: From a casting perspective a writer, I imagine, has little input, please could you talk about each main actor, their characters and what you’ve seen from their performances on screen?
TF: Normally the writer has zero input when it comes to casting. But Patrick was amazingly generous in his willingness to include me. From the beginning Patrick leaked the audition tapes to me. I would weigh in on who I liked. Just my opinion. But it was fun because we always gravitated to the same actor. Normally he would keep his opinion to himself to get my gut reaction. But once or twice he was so enthusiastic he would call and say, “You’ve GOT to watch this tape!” He did that with Jaime. She was stunning. He did that with Betsy. Both were absolute standouts. I think he broke protocol with Edi as well because Edi brought this level of suspicion to the role that I certainly hadn’t thought to write. I recall discussing Megan with Patrick. The studio had a different look in mind. Patrick had to fight for Megan so it was fun to see her awarded “Most Likely to Become a Fan Boy Crush” after the screening.
I remember calling Patrick after I first saw Kerr’s tape. It’s hard to explain. You’re sitting there watching tape after tape after tape and suddenly it clicks. Kerr clicked. Then Jensen was cast and it was simply perfect. First time I saw those two on screen together I was riveted. And I when you saw them on set you got the sense that they genuinely dug the characters and wanted the movie to rock. I recall Jensen telling Kerr, “You know, when I say this, you should say this…” And now it’s one of Kerr’s best lines in the movie. And I didn’t write it. Jensen came up with it and handed it off to his comrade. That’s a level of professionalism in a dog-eat-dog-jealous world that you just don’t find.
Then you have Kevin and Tom. Kevin brought reality to the story. Believability. When Kevin speaks you shut the hell up and sit down. He brought a level of perfectionism most genre flicks never experience. And there’s Tom Atkins…A moment of silence please… I’m simply not worthy. Tom Atkins is horror royalty. I don’t think Lionsgate fully understood that until we had the screening. The fans went ape. I wish Tom could have been there to see it.
And then there’s me. I play Frank the Trucker. I’ll let you decide if I’m any good or not.
DA: I’ve heard that Patrick Lussier refers to Jensen Ackles as a young Steve McQueen; he’s certainly a very popular actor. How important was it to this film to have him as one of the leads?
TF: Jensen played the role better than I’d written it. So, that said, he was crucial. His choices made it a better movie. It’s to a point now that I can’t imagine anyone else in the role. Being a great actor should be enough. But no. He’s got to be infuriatingly good looking as well. With that deep milk chocolate voice. He’d be amazingly easy to hate if he wasn’t such great guy.
We had a scene together. Not an easy scene by the way. Not for anyone involved. And while I did shine as Fredrick in The Pirates Of Penzance, this was only my second film. But Jensen was… well… he was simply cool.
I’m fearful that the MBV experience will be hard to beat as my career continues.
DA: How privy were you access wise on this production? Did you have much other input once you'd turned the script in?
TF: Normally I would have none but again, I had access to my friend who just happened to be the director. Because of that my input goes slightly beyond the writer job description. I worked on the opening newspaper credit sequence. I voiced a cartoon playing in the background during an intense scene. I voiced, “Martin, Line two” in another. Of course it helps that I got an invite to visit Skywalker Sound while they were mixing… and by the way… Skywalker Sound. Drool. I’m astounded that any production would edit or mix anywhere else. But as for my input, I didn’t mind. In fact, I’m glad I could be a continuing part of the process.
DA: Was the film always meant to be in 3D? As a writer did you write any specific scenes to capitalise on this?
TF: No. It went 3D just before my involvement. But even though it was 3D my first draft was all story and characters. I don’t recall even mentioning 3D but you have to understand that we’re talking about the new 3D. It’s immersive. It’s depth. It’s not about picks and blood and boobs flying at your face. That said, later I did do a pass to address picks and blood and boobs flying at your face.
DA: You’ve been a screenwriter in Hollywood for a while now. Can you tell me about some of the highs and lows you’ve experienced so far and what you would advise to any budding writers out there looking to break into the movie business?
TF: Highs and Lows. This is a high by the way. Well, getting any movie made is a high but this is a real high because the movie is good. Not only good, it is a strong representation of my work. So there are lots of highs on this one. But there were plenty of lows getting here.
The lows can be summed up very simply. Writers don’t have much power. I succeeded because of Patrick Lussier. Without him I would have been rewritten and discarded.
DA: Could you tell me about a few of your new projects you’ve been working on, for instance Monkey's Paw? What’s it about and why do you think your Valentine star Kerr Smith is perfect for a role in it?
TF: Monkey’s Paw is loosely based on the short story by W.W. Jacobs. It’s “be careful what you wish for” and it’s the darkest script I’ve ever written. So dark my wife told me while writing it, “The place you have gone in order to write this...I don’t like it. I don’t like you. I think you should sleep at the office until you finish it.”
Kerr would be perfect because Kerr is an actor who continuously brings the unexpected. Truth is, Kerr would be perfect in just about any role.
As for other projects, Patrick and I have a few irons in the fire. Stories that we not only developed together but will write together as well; too early to get into details as those deals are in the works. I’m writing Devil’s Commandos for Thomas Jane to act in and direct. And I’m finishing up an animated feature that serves as the pilot to an animated series. I also watched a rough cut of Messengers II last week. It was so much fun!
DA: I’m dying for one of my favourite filmmakers, John Carpenter, to return to directing features – what’s the status on your project Psychopath and will it ever see the light of day?
TF: Like you, I would have loved to see it move forward. The project has hit a number of odd obstacles. Anytime I talk to the producers they tell me it’s still alive. It’s a great story, so maybe the planets will align and the cogs will fall into place.
To view the trailer, click here
Eye For Film wishes to thank Todd for his time, especially during a crazy busy press period.
