I am very happy today to welcome back actor David Zooey Hall to CINEMATIC REVELATIONS for a new feature on the blog, ‘Five Questions’. David has been on the blog previously elaborating about his part as Rocky in FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES and many other topics; the interview is here. In this post David here will be discussing his role as Albert Robertson in I DISMEMBER MAMA [my review of the film can be found here] which was an excellent interpretation of a troubled, psychopathic young man with many layers.
Welcome back to CINEMATIC REVELATIONS David!
Athan: Your acting in I DISMEMBER MAMA, as with all your performances, was infused with a reality, and depth, that made Albert utterly compelling to watch. Despite his heinous actions, one still felt a sympathy for Albert, which is a mark of thoughtful acting. What was it that drew you to taking on this part?
David: According to Paul Leder (Director) he saw my photo in the Players Directory, contacted me and offered me the part when we met in person & I said “Ok.”
*
Athan: Albert was a character involved in many heavy sequences throughout the movie which provided a thorough insight into his shattered state of mind. Which were the scenes that, for you, were the most challenging emotionally to film in I DISMEMBER MAMA?
David: There were a couple. One was having to kiss Geri Reischl, who played Annie in the film. Geri was very sweet, kind & talented. And about to receive her very first kiss in reel life as well as in real life. And was apprehensive about it. I never asked her how old she was. But I guessed she hadn’t reached the double digits yet. And all I could think of was: “Don’t screw this up for her – it’s her first kiss & all.” I have a sister I adore in real life. And have always felt protective of. That’s what the kiss was: not the character I was portraying, but me, as a person, extending a protective gesture to Geri, my sweet partner in the scene we were playing – in the form of a kiss.
*
Athan: Paul Leder was the director of many feature films, ranging from comedy in MARIGOLD MAN, adventure epic APE, murder suspense in THE BABY DOLL MURDERS, and the comedic zaniness of THE WACKY ADVENTURES OF DR. BORIS AND NURSE SHIRLEY. What was it like working with Mr Leder on I DISMEMBER MAMA?
David: He was wonderful. The first day of shooting Paul was explaining to me the first shot that was about to take place. Cigarette in his right hand. All of a sudden in mid sentence he begins to tilt to the left and then his long frame suddenly hurtles across the room … hits the wall in front of him – and crumples to the floor. He hits the wall with such force that his glasses fly from his face, and the cigarette he’s smoking flies out of his hand to the right. Then he starts groping on the floor to the right for the cigarette, which he somehow puts his right hand on. Then, with his left hand he locates his glasses. Then he somehow gathers himself up, crosses back to me on the other side of the room – and picks up the conversation we were having exactly & precisely where he left it. Then, after taking a big drag on the cigarette still smoking, he says to me: “Don’t worry about what just happened. Its just a little Vertigo that comes on from time to time. Nothin’ to worry about.” I remember thinking at this exact moment: “This is going to be interesting.”
*
Athan: Have you kept in contact with any cast members or crew from I DISMEMBER MAMA?
David: Actually, I kept in touch with Paul’s wife, Etyl. She worked at a Drug store in Hollywood. And whenever I was in the area, I’d stop in & visit Etyl.
*
Athan: While I DISMEMBER MAMA was serious in tone, glitches and fun moments can abound on movie sets. Was there a humorous time during filming that you remember with fondness?
David: That would have to be my answer to question #1. Whenever I’ve thought about that first exchange with Paul Leder, the first day of shooting - it makes me smile. Glad I had the chance to work with him.
*
It has been a pleasure having you again on the blog David, and I thank you for giving readers a further understanding of the complex, charismatic Albert Robertson, and, in turn, I DISMEMBER MAMA. You are always welcome to return whenever you wish.
Synopsis: Upon the death of his daughter of a drug overdose, a federal agent plans to take down drug traffickers in Marseilles with assistance from people whose lives were affected by narcotics.
Within a film history context: Motion pictures which have the theme of drug traffickers have been presented in cinema for many years, and in various forms. One of the first was Fred Niblo's YOUNG DONOVAN'S KID (1931). Starring Richard Dix, it followed a man who attempts to stop a drug dealer from foisting his trade on young children. Jack Holt was the star of 1932's BEHIND THE MASK, directed by John Francis Dillon. In this movie, Mr Holt makes an escape from prison with the intention of breaking a heroin drug ring. Matters were different in Herbert Brenon's LIVING DANGEROUSLY (1936). In this movie, the drug trafficker was a doctor involved in selling illicit drugs to addicts, and is discovered by his partner, thus ending this union. Double cross and treachery ensued between the two men before the good doctor is found innocent, and equilibrium reestablished. Into the 1950s, FINGER MAN (1955), directed by Harold D. Schuster, featured another spin on the theme. The psychological makeup of the characters in this film was more ambiguous than other tales, with a former criminal wanting to take down a crime kingpin responsible for making his sister an addict. More exploitative in content and intent, Joseph W. Mawra's OLGA'S GIRLS (1964) again threw another twist in the drug trafficker theme. In this instance, a woman is the drug dealer who keeps young women on a string with drugs, but her sadistic tendencies inspire their wrath, and she attempts to find out who is trying to take her down. The 1970s brought further explorations of the consequences of drug trafficking on those affected by their actions. Don Chain's GINGER (1971) was an exploitation film about a young woman going undercover to do away with an organized crime/drug ring. It is mainly of interest as, with OLGA'S GIRLS, the protagonist was female, an undercover agent played by Cheri Caffaro, and also featured gay pornography model Casey Donovan in this R-rated effort. Much more well known, and one of the most commercially successful pictures on drug trafficking was THE FRENCH CONNECTION (1971), directed by William Friedkin. A determined New York City police officer's pursuit of a French drug trafficker, based upon a real-life case, was one of the most exciting, well-acted films about the theme. 1973 marked the release of two more films dealing with drug dealers and traffickers. Jack Hill's COFFY, again with a female lead character, starred Pam Grier as a young woman seeking revenge against the drug dealers responsible for her sister's passing. GORDON'S WAR, directed by Ossie Davis, had a band of Vietnam veterans waging war against drug dealers and other criminals in New York City. HIT!, while carving its own path, had both similarities to past films in the genre, but diverged from them in other ways. It shared some affinities with YOUNG DONOVAN'S KID and BEHIND THE MASK in that a male character assigned himself with the mission of stopping a drug ring. Where HIT! diverted was that the lead protagonist, Nick Allen, did not work on his own. While the other films were mostly about a single character taking on the drug trade, HIT! had Nick, a federal agent, enlist the assistance of several people whose lives were affected by drugs, such as himself, whose daughter died of a drug overdose. This made the film slightly more akin to movies such as THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN (1960) in that a band of people became a team to help overthrow an oppressor. While this particular film did not deal with drugs, the grouping of different characters had a like structure to HIT! The difference between the two movies, though, is that in THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN the characters were all men, and gunfighters, while in HIT! the majority of characters were amateur assassins, with two female characters in the team. This gave HIT! a point of differentiation, and also, some more poignant moments of reflection than the former film.
On the other hand, HIT! harked back to THE FRENCH CONNECTION, in that a man employed by the government took it upon himself to take on drug traffickers on their own game. Both films had charismatic lead characters who the audience could relate to, and understand the rationale for their actions. Neither Nick Allen, nor Popeye Doyle, were ex-criminals or morally cloudy, but both heroes in their distinctive way. The conclusion of HIT!, though, tied up loose ends successfully in the first instance, unlike THE FRENCH CONNECTION, where a sequel appeared in 1975. As HIT! is seen by many quarters as an example of Blaxploitation, it also shares some semblance to COFFY, in that the protagonist has lost a relative to drugs. HIT!, though, also has elements of the revenge film within its structure which merit discussion.
Where Michael Winner's DEATH WISH (1974) does not deal explicitly with drugs, but has a lead dispatching character after character in New York City, its focus in who is marked for death is not as studied as HIT! Nick Allen carefully plans his hits on drug traffickers with precision and care, ensuring that his team are fully on board. Unlike Paul Kersey in DEATH WISH, where he marks unknown, random criminals for death, and never those who killed his wife, and raped his daughter, Nick Allen knows from the beginning who he wants to do away with, and goes from there in exacting his revenge. Nick Allen is as single-minded as the female lead of the later I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE (1978), directed by Meir Zarchi, who avenges those who have wronged her in an equally (but more explicit filmically, alas less stylish) fashion. In summing up, it can be said that HIT! is a film which adds some original touches to the crime genre which make it an interesting movie to watch.
Overview: Sidney J. Furie is a prolific filmmaker who over the course of his sixty-three year career has directed forty-five feature films, with another currently in post-production. Mr Furie is a generalist who has made movies in a number of genres, from crime, action, adventure, comedy to romance. His first film, A DANGEROUS AGE (1957) was a romance which charted the obstacles two young people faced in becoming a couple. Into the 1960s, he made THE BOYS (1962). A drama set in 1960s London, it followed the exploits of four teenagers involved in crime, a theme which Mr Furie explored on various occasions in his career. His next notable film was THE LEATHER BOYS (1964). This was the story of a young woman who marries a biker, this explaining the leather of the title, and how his relationship with his friend impacts on the marriage. Starring a largely British cast, it was another step forward for Mr Furie in making daring movies. 1965 brought THE IPCRESS FILE to audiences. A thriller of espionage and double-cross, again with a British cast including Michael Caine and Gordon Jackson, it is noteworthy as a predecessor for the theme Mr Furie would later investigate in HIT! As a change of pace, Mr Furie then tackled the action-romance genre in THE APPALOOSA (1966). Starring Marlon Brando, it focused upon a man's quest to take back his horse which has been appropriated by a Mexican man. The 1970s was a time of growth for Mr Furie, when he would make films about copious themes. With the inception of the 1970s, Mr Furie released THE LAWYER (1970). It followed a lawyer who becomes involved in a murder case, and was a change of pace for the director. The same year he made the action film, LITTLE FAUSS AND BIG HALSY (1970) starring Robert Redford as a biker. Mr Furie then filmed the biography of singer Billie Holliday, LADY SINGS THE BLUES (1972). With Diana Ross as Miss Holliday, it was one of his most famous, well-remembered movies, with memorable musical trimmings. The remainder of the 1970s featured various types of movies in mr Furie's oeuvre. SHEILA LEVINE IS DEAD AND LIVING IN NEW YORK (1975) gave Mr Furie the opportunity to display his aptitude for comedy. In this movie, a young woman who moves to New York City and finds love. Mr Furie again tackled a biographical film, GABLE AND LOMBARD (1976). The story of Clark Gable and his ill-fated wife Carole Lombard, it was a movie of a more romantic nature than usual, but was critically derided upon release. Sidney Furie looked at Vietnam with THE BOYS IN COMPANY C (1977). A film with much profanity, it provided its cast with a realistic story about a boot camp that turns into a nightmare once the soldiers arrive in Vietnam. In the 1980s Mr Furie's movies were not as prominent as his 1970s pictures. After uncredited direction on two movies, he made THE ENTITY (1982). A horror film about a woman who is menaced by a demon she cannot see but of which she can definitely feel the presence, it was the first time he had made a horror genre entry. With PURPLE HEARTS (1984), Mr Furie revisited Vietnam, this time charting the love story of a doctor and a nurse. The remainder of the decade was devoted to two instalments of the IRON EAGLE franchise in 1986 and 1988 respectively, and, in 1987, a film in the Superman franchise, SUPERMAN IV: THE QUEST FOR PEACE. HIT!, as with Mr Furie's other films, has an intricate structure that organizes the movie. In this particular instance, though, this has both its positive, and negative aspects. While HIT! takes its time in establishing certain parts of the story for viewers, such as giving viewers an insight into the public images of drug traffickers, who work in places such as fashion houses, this can be frustrating at times to watch. In the first half, the film is a mixed bag of elements. It begins in a very nonchalant manner, showing how a young woman dies from a drug overdose, and her father's reaction to this. Even though one can feel Nick Allen's loss as Billy Dee Williams plays his part with great subtlety, the spectator is never given the chance to really understand the father-daughter relationship. There are no scenes of them together, or flashbacks, to move the viewer further with Nick Allen's plight. Events just occur in a cut and dry manner which is largely symptomatic of the film as a whole. Many times it lacks an emotional core which runs the viewer hot and cold. There are many scenes in the first half which could have been tightened or eliminated, such as Nick Allen's scene with Sherry Nielson which seems to take forever to get up off the ground, and is all the more grating for the profanity it contains which comes thick and fast. This also points to what occurs in the second half of HIT! which is also problematic in retrospect. Where the first segment of the movie was slow in setting the scene for viewers, the second part concentrates on the execution of Nick Allen's plan in more rapid fashion. This also has a jarring effect as the killings take place one after the other, and there is little, or no, toll on the people who carry these out. While there is some exploration of characters hesitant with what they are about to do, such as in Ida's case, it is rarely shown, except in Sherry's case, how they feel after being involved in these killings. Again, events just happen, without any reactions exhibited by characters. This renders the film rather cold and systematic, more of a stylistic exercise than anything else. It is as if the ducks have been set up to be fired at, with just finding different ways of murdering people to provide short-term thrills and spills. Despite these deficiencies, HIT! does have some strengths that provide reprieve when watching the movie. While HIT! does contain violent content, it is much milder than what was occurring onscreen at this time in other crime movies. Some of the killings are quite disturbing to witness, but Mr Furie does not linger too long at these moments, preferring to cut away completely when the action could become too intense or gory. This has the effect of making the film less exploitative of human carnage than others, thereby making it all the more artistic, its restraint admirable under the circumstances. The handling of the film's most heart-rending moments is also very good, particularly Ida's scenes as she recounts what happened in her life. Ida seeing a drugged man in the room, which brings back haunting memories, is probably the film's most true to life, insightful segment. The introduction of some black comedy inserts in the second half seems slightly strange, as the first part was mostly serious in nature, but, it does work in an unconventional way, giving the film some oomph when least expected. Aside from these points, even though the film is quite uneven in its combination of elements, there is something about it that should be noted. HIT! should be commended as a film that does not glamorize drug trafficking and abuse, its director's sincerity in taking on this issue laudable.
Acting: The acting in HIT! is one of its strongest assets. In the lead role of Nick Allen, Billy Dee Williams has his trademark easy-going charm which always makes him a great actor to watch, but this time coupled with a more thoughtful undercurrent which works well in the film. He is the ideal choice for a central character, with both humorous, and edgier moments performed with panache by Mr Williams. His chemistry with the other characters should also be mentioned, working well with characters of all temperaments in the movie. As Mike Willmer, Richard Pryor is well matched with Billy Dee Williams, Mr Pryor's more explosive style a good contrast to Mr Williams' smooth charisma. Mr Pryor is well-known for his use of expletives in other films which sometimes becomes too much to bear, but in this film his swearing has a definite purpose, and reason for being. As a man who has lost someone to drugs, his anger-fuelled swearing sessions take on a more emotional significance in HIT!, giving his performance, and the film, as a whole, added credence. The remainder of the cast do a fine job in the movie which immeasurably assists it. Janet Bandt, as Ida, a woman who has lost her son to drugs, is excellently portrayed by Miss Bandt. In both her most emotional, and in the black comedy scenes, she projects the utmost sincerity and realism, being the film's finest female acting contribution. On the other hand, while she tries hard, Gwen Welles did not seem to register in her role as Sherry. Possibly she was miscast in the film, but the movie needed someone such as Barbara Hershey, or Margot Kidder, to give the role more impetus, to make the scenes more powerful. There is, though, one supporting role in HIT! which is particularly noteworthy, but too brief on screen. As Carlin, the live wire, trigger-happy hitman, David Zooey Hall adds another distinctive portrayal to his gallery of exceptional film performances. An actor who appeared in little more than a handful of films, his interpretations of characters are unique viewing experiences. As always, Mr Hall makes his character a real, flesh and blood person for the viewer, in what is a seamless melding of actor and character. One of the delights of seeing late 1960s, and 1970s films is witnessing Mr Hall's performances which are intriguing, and penetrating. Soundtrack: Lalo Schifrin's score is insistent in tone but suits HIT! perfectly. It especially emphasizes the film during its quieter stretches such as the funeral of Nick Allen's daughter, but is utilized in a spare manner throughout, this working out for the best for the film overall. The score is reminiscent of previous movies set in World War II with its drum beat, the implication being that HIT! is also a war film of sorts in the gun battles and its other carefully staged sequences of mayhem, death and destruction.
Mise-en-scene: Use of locations and sets is one of the best aspects of HIT! The outdoor sequences are filmed with vigor and style by the director, the car chase scenes exciting, and choice of locations such as the wintry fishing town where the team are staying appropriate. Other places such as Sherry's hotel room, the fashion house, and various restaurants are also well selected, and of a high standard. Costuming is also excellent, with Mr Williams and Mr Hall, in particular, wearing sartorially elegant garments, and the remainder of the cast also decked out in clothing which fits with the personality of their characters. Additionally, the opening credits are entirely in black and white, only displaying the names of the cast and crew. Accompanied by Lalo Schifrin's score, these imply for the viewer a feeling of immediacy, and suspense, with what is to follow.
Award-worthy performances in my opinion: Billy Dee Williams, Richard Pryor, Janet Bandt, David Zooey Hall.
Suitability for young viewers: No. Frequent coarse language, female nudity, adult themes, medium-level violence.
Title: I DISMEMBER MAMA (Alternate title POOR ALBERT AND LITTLE ANNIE)
Year of Release: 1972
Director: Paul Leder
Genre: Horror, Crime
Synopsis: A mentally unbalanced young man escapes from a mental health facility, intent on committing matricide, and begins a killing spree.
Within a film history context: Psychotic characters have been part and parcel of cinema for a very long time. One of the first films to present a serial killer was Robert Wiene's THE CABINET OF DR CALIGARI (1921). A German film of the silent era, it had an evil hypnotist using another man to murder people. The sound age also brought with it further depictions of sadistic and psychotic characters. Victor Halperin's 1933 SUPERNATURAL, starring Carole Lombard, featured her as a reincarnated murderess seeking revenge on a man who did her wrong. From the 1940s, THE STRANGE CASE OF DR RX (1942), directed by William Nigh, was a mystery of serial mobster murders, and how a criminal defense lawyer brought the culprit to justice. More blatant in its themes was Edgar G. Ulmer's BLACKBEARD (1946) where a Parisian artist kills his models after painting their portraits. Director Douglas Sirk's LURED (1947) was another mystery where police hunt a serial killer who finds his victims via newspaper personals. The 1950s was also a decade where the serial killer theme received another workout, many times in exploitation films. The films became increasingly violent in context, but not explicitly onscreen, in keeping with post-war pessimism in cinema. 1952's WITHOUT WARNING, an Arnold Laven production, centred around a man killing women resembling his wife with garden shears. More subtle was Edward Dmytryk's SNIPER (1952), with police trying to find the killer of young women. More overt in its sinister themes was VIOLATED (1953), directed by Walter Strate. A dark exploitation film, it had a man who scalped his hapless victims. JACK THE RIPPER (1959), a film co-directed by Robert S. Baker and Monty Berman, was another film retelling of this real life incident, with an American assisting in the case. The early 1960s produced what are now some of the most well-known, and influential, serial killer/psychopath feature films. Alfred Hitchcock's PYSCHO (1960) was a seminal film that featured a psychopathic protagonist who dealt variously in murder and mayhem. The same year, Michael Powell's PEEPING TOM was unleashed to audiences. The story of a man who photographs the reactions of women as they realize their impending deaths, it was seen as tasteless upon first release, but has gained a cult reputation with the years. FOG FOR A KILLER (1962), directed by Montgomery Tully, was about a man believed to kill young blonde women. Frank Tashlin's THE ALPHABET MURDERS (1965) presented Tony Randall as Hercule Poirot, hunting for a killer choosing his victims by their initials. Later in the decade, Herschell Gordon Lewis' THE GRUESOME TWOSOME (1967) was about a man who scalped women for his family's wig store, similar to VIOLATED. As evidenced by the above synopses, films began to showcase increasingly bizarre, and violent examinations of psychotic characters, the loosening of censorship facilitating this. Stuart E. McGowan's THE ICE HOUSE (1970) revolved around a man who murders women and stores them in the ice house, and commits more heinous crimes. 10 RILLINGTON PLACE (1971), directed by Richard Fleischer, with Richard Attenborough in an excellent performance as real-life serial killer John Christie. Mario Bava's A BAY OF BLOOD (1971) was a bloodthirsty film about the death of a countess, and how it led to murders. In turn, Roger Vadim's PRETTY MAIDS ALL IN A ROW (1971) was another film of young women being dispatched, and all attending a Californian high school. These are just several examples of what audiences were seeing in cinemas at the time, with many studio, and exploitation features being produced. I DISMEMBER MAMA was both similar to the content of these films but also, diverged from them in several ways. The first similarity is that the lead character of I DISMEMBER MAMA was a psychotic character who craved sadistic and inhumane methods of treating his victims. Albert Robertson has much in common with Norman Bates from PSYCHO in terms of having a mother complex, and PEEPING TOM with how his victims die. There is also the woman-hating theme that pervades pretty much all the films in the genre, but in I DISMEMBER MAMA it stems from an intense dislike of a mother figure that colours the character's perception of women. While this is explicitly stated in the film, it is never explained as to why this is so, but it appears that this has also skewed Albert's views of women's sexuality. Underneath this is a closeted fear of women, and a concurrent view of female sexuality as dangerous. I DISMEMBER MAMA, though, diverts from other films in certain important ways. While the film has several hair-raising moments, particularly with regards to the killing scenes, it is much more restrained than films of its era in terms of depicting these events. The film is more a psychological exploration of a diseased mind, and its effect on other people, than an all-out slasher movie. The director has carefully mapped a series of narrative events with an emphasis on the acting, rather than the overt spectacle of gore. While the film does contain a minute amount of gore, the action, by and large, cuts away from the actual incidents, preferring to show the aftermath of the act rather than when it was taking place. In comparison to other films of the genre, there is also a low body count, which is attributable to the director's tight focus that eliminates unnecessary characters, and action, from the movie. It utilizes its small cast to maximum advantage, with one main exception. The mother figure is fleetingly shown which is disappointing, but possibly to keep the focus more on Albert, and the other characters. Nevertheless, all of these qualities raise I DISMEMBER MAMA several notches above in stature from other exploitation films, to being more of an actors' piece.
Overview: Paul Leder was known predominately for his quirky exploitation movies, many times revolving around psychopaths, and their murderous intent over his twenty-five year directorial career. His first feature film, MARIGOLD MAN (1970) was a comedy about two roommates who yearn to plant a huge garden of marigold flowers. Other offbeat films were APE (1976) about a ghorilla who kidnaps an actress, and the mayhem that ensues. RED LIGHT IN THE WHITE HOUSE (1977) was a drama about a reporter investigating someone running for the Senate, and finding much fodder in the process. Murder was on the menu in SKETCHES OF A STRANGLER (1978) with a man strangling women, with one of his victims seeking him out for revenge. Mr Leder's final film, THE KILLERS WITHIN (1995), was a mystery about a man delving into the details of his brother's death, and finding more than he bargained for. I DISMEMBER MAMA, released in 1972, was Mr Leder's second film, and one of his most well-known efforts. The movie is a horror drama of a disturbed young man who escapes from a mental health facility, intent on killing his mother, but kills other women in his path, with the exception of a young girl, daughter of his mother's housekeeper. Mr Leder had directed a tightly made, well-cast movie, produced on a small budget, but containing much suspense. Unlike other movies in the genre, he has made a movie that is spare on the gore, preferring instead to focus upon the psychological whims of its main character, and those with whom he comes into contact. It is an appropriately lit, moody film, that could be characterized as being misogynistic in nature, but, there is, in fact, one male victim in the film. These qualities, though, are not to say that the film is without its flaws. While the film is technically well-made, otherwise, it has certain lapses which do hinder its impact. Its title, first of all, misrepresents the film to a great degree. I DISMEMBER MAMA gives the impression that this is an explicit slasher movie, but, this could not be further from the truth. The film is in fact more of a psychological thriller than a full-on serial killer movie, the acting more paramount than overt spectacles of killing or maiming. The original title, POOR ALBERT AND LITTLE ANNIE would have been more appropriate under the circumstances, or something to the effect of ALBERT ROBERTSON, PSYCHOPATH may have worked better. Apart from this, the story also has some omissions which deserve discussion. While the main character, Albert Robertson, has an intense hatred of his mother, it is not explained as to why he feels this way. The film poses several questions that it does not answer in an adequate manner. Is this because Mrs Robertson is delusional, not taking him and his issues seriously? Was there another reason for disliking her so much? The film is hampered in this respect as the two actors do not even share a scene together, and there is no fallout on the mother's side with what happens to Albert. This raises another issue in the movie - why was Mrs Robertson made to largely seem catatonic throughout the film? This does not take advantage of drama that could have played out to a great degree by making her more active and cognizant. Having the doctor not inform her of Albert's actions takes the edge slightly away from the film, but possibly this occurred to have the remainder of the movie play out as it did. Another matter is that Albert's father is never mentioned in the film, and this leads to hypotheses - did he hate Albert's mother as much as he does, and carried this over to his son? Were Albert's actions the direct effect of not having a male father figure in the movie? I DISMEMBER MAMA also makes other convenient choices that work to further the plot, but, could have been tested somewhat. Why was Albert in a low-security facility? The police ushered Mrs Robertson out of the mansion, but why not Alice and Annie? Both of these scenarios made the medical profession, and the police, seem foolish. Despite these plot inconsistencies, the film does follow a linear fashion, keeping true to the main character and his actions. While I DISMEMBER MAMA is not a perfect movie, it is one of the best-acted, tightly made films in the genre to ever appear onscreen.
Acting: The performances of the players in I DISMEMBER MAMA give the film an edge over other films in the horror genre. As the movie's protagonist Albert Robertson, David Zooey Hall offers an excellent interpretation of the cunning, psychotic Albert. With Mr Hall the viewer always receives a fully-fleshed portrait of a complex person, and this film is no exception. His Albert is a character who is murderous and evil, but Mr Hall is such a great actor that he gets under the skin of his role, and gives him a depth and vulnerability that make Albert Robertson a compelling, multi-faceted villain. Mr Hall shows the audience, with utter precision, that Albert has severe psychological problems, and that while he tries to fight his urges to harm and kill, his will is not strong enough to repress these impulses. While one does not agree with what Albert does, Mr Hall makes you understand why he commits these crimes. His acting takes the typical role of a psychotic killer into another sphere, without the need for masks, or scenery-chewing. David Zooey Hall receives great backing from the other actors in I DISMEMBER MAMA, the supporting actors also bringing realism to the film. Marlene Tracy, as Albert's victim Alice, is chilling in her reactions to Albert, realizing her fate with open-eyed horror. The scene with Albert covers many emotions, and is delivered in a moving, compelling fashion. Joanne Moore Jordan, as Albert's mother, does well in a role which, unfortunately, limits her scope. While it is interesting that she acts in a calm manner to Albert's actions, and there is the quiet realization on her part that her son is not well, she is not showcased enough in the movie, which is disappointing. It would have added further to the movie to have her character's emotions displayed more to the viewer, and given an even better picture of Albert and his mother's relationship. Nevertheless, two other actors make up for this with their well-defined parts. Greg Mullavey, as the policeman sent to bring Albert to justice, performs his role as the seasoned detective with a sympathy and relaxed candour that works. His final scenes with Annie wrap up the film's action in a satisfying manner. As the young Annie in the film, Geri Reischl exhibits a freshness and youthful appeal without making her too sunny or hokey. Also, she ably presents Annie as a young girl who is not only genial but also, intuitive, and clever. Just seeing her in the final few scenes with Albert, taking him on in his own game, shows what a capable young actress Miss Reischl was.
Soundtrack: The film has much background music during its running time, especially at key moments in the narrative such as Albert's quiet scenes with Annie. It is eerie and gothic by turns, but also has the habit of sometimes punctuating the action in an unsubtle manner, where little or no music would have been more effective. There is also the unusual use of a song with lyrics, being 'Poor Albert' at the time of Albert and Annie's seaside outing, but, this is no ordinary film, the song highlighting the main character's state of mind.
Mise-en-scene: I DISMEMBER MAMA uses its locations sparingly, and these are all well-chosen, and appropriate for their purposes. From the mental health facility, to the Robertson family mansion, to the hazy pool hall where Albert picks up one of his victims, the employment of settings is one of the strongest elements of the film. Probably the best set piece is the dark mannequin warehouse where Albert seeks another victim; the collection of mannequins is suitably spooky, and this provides a fitting, memorable ending to the movie. The opening credits are also good, setting the tone for Albert's mood, and the film as a whole, with Albert watching a movie, only the light from the projector illuminating his face.
Award-worthy performances in my opinion: David Zooey Hall, Marlene Tracy, Joanne Moore Jordan, Greg Mullavey, Geri Reischl.
Suitability for young viewers: No. Female nudity, adult themes, high-level violence.
Synopsis: A young black man's coming of age in 1920s Kansas.
Within a film history context: Films with African-American families as protagonists have appeared in many instances in cinema over time. One of the first in this vein was Douglas Sirk's IMITATION OF LIFE (1959). Contrasting a white woman's relationship with her daughter to that of an African-American woman's with her daughter, much of the drama centred around the black daughter's refusal to admit she was African-American. At the other end of the spectrum was Daniel Petrie's A RAISIN IN THE SUN (1961). Starring Sidney Poitier, it was about a family who was to receive an insurance payout, but this was a mixed blessing for the family due to disagreement about how it should be used. In addition to these films, the 1970s brought further interesting depictions of African-American families in film. Martin Ritt's SOUNDER (1972) was a splendid drama examining the effects on a family of the father stealing bread, and being sent to a work gang. CLAUDINE (1974), directed by John Berry, was the romance of a garbage collector who falls for a single mother of six children, with dramatic and comic results. Another film dealing with an African-American family was Horace Jackson's TOUGH (1974). In this film, a young boy rails against his home life, particularly his mother and stepfather, seeking to find his identity. THE LEARNING TREE had some thematic elements in common with these films, SOUNDER in particular, but, deviated from these movies in certain ways.
THE LEARNING TREE, as with SOUNDER, had a young male lead as its protagonist, but, was decidedly more adult in its intentions. While SOUNDER had a more family-oriented, inspirational tone, THE LEARNING TREE dealt with issues such as death, murder, jealousy, sex, miscegenation and racism in a freer manner, the lead experiencing more angst overall than the teenager in SOUNDER. Newt in THE LEARNING TREE endures rivalries with both Marcus and Chauncey, while SOUNDER's David Lee does not have anyone who tests his mettle, only life events themselves. As with SOUNDER, there is the interaction of both white and black characters in all aspects, with the focus largely on a single black family. In all, THE LEARNING TREE was a particularly full-blooded movie compared to previous examples in terms of narrative events and scope, and, as with the other films, did have its heart in the right place.
Overview: Gordon Parks was a photojournalist for Life magazine who began directing films in the late 1960s. Among his most notable movies are two films in the Shaft franchise, SHAFT (1971) and its sequel SHAFT'S BIG SCORE! (1972). A combination of Blaxploitation, crime, and heady action, these films were successful at the box office, opening the door to further movies with African-American protagonists. Mr Parks also directed another crime/action film, THE SUPER COPS, in 1974, and presented the biography of blues singer Huddie Leadbetter, LEADBELLY, to audiences in 1976. THE LEARNING TREE, his first full-length feature film released in 1969, was his most prestigious motion picture.
An adaptation of Mr Parks' semi-autobiographical novel published in 1963, outlining his experience as a teenager in 1920s Kansas, this is a beautiful, solemn film that captures a time in the world as seen through the eyes of lead character, Newt. The narrative unfolds in a leisurely but intriguing manner, the director guiding his characters through the events in the story in an assured way. Mr Parks has explored a number of themes in an honest way, such as family, first love, and, most importantly, racism. The relationships between white and black people in THE LEARNING TREE are variously respectful, tense, and, at times, utterly wrought with difficulties. Despite these positive qualities, the handling of the story by the director has, though, both its advantages, and disadvantages.
Mr Parks has, on the one hand, delivered a story that maintains a concentration on its lead protagonist, Newt, and does not deviate from this. While this is an admirable move, having the film following this mode does take away a little from its power, marginalizing the movie as a result. It would have been fantastic to see more of the supporting characters such as the immoral Big Mabel, Silas Newhall, Judge Cavanaugh, and, in particular, Chauncey Cavanaugh, as they could have provided more dynamite action and confrontations drawn from their actions. I was expecting, for example, explosive father-son conflict between the Judge and his licentious son, in the manner of Blake and Adam Carrington's feud on DYNASTY, but, it never came to fruition. In summation overall, putting its flaws to the side, THE LEARNING TREE is a film which has substance, and is a very sound rendition of a long-ago time in American history.
Acting: THE LEARNING TREE is filled with fine performances from all its actors. In the lead role, Kyle Johnson delivers understated acting as the thoughtful Newt, a teenager with more scruples than most. A young man witnessing traumatic events which mature him as a person, his role in the film is multi-faceted. Newt is not only the son and brother but also, the rival, the victim and, the vindicator. This provides Mr Johnson with ample opportunities to display his skill, and he carries off the role beautifully. Estelle Evans is wonderful as Newt's understanding mother Sarah in THE LEARNING TREE. She underplays the role which makes her scenes with Newt, and in the movie as a whole moving, and haunting in retrospect. Alex Clarke, as Newt's rival Marcus, delivers a performance with gusto and passion, his jealousy of Newt driving him to mental instability, and criminal acts, in the film. In addition to the main actors, supporting roles have also been filled by accomplished actors who bring life to the film in their parts.
Dana Elcar is great as the calculating, gun-happy sheriff Kirky whose actions twist the plot in shocking, and unexpected directions. His apathetic, stony reactions to certain events in the film make him a chilling villain. Richard Ward did a splendid job as the morally dubious Booker Savage, Marcus's father, his large eyes conveying either terror and malice in his scenes. As Judge Cavanaugh, Russell Thorson was just right as the empathetic judge who was powerless to enforce law due to the characters' simmering emotions, and his private demons with his own wayward son. In a small role as Chauncey Cavanaugh, David Zooey Hall makes a striking impression as the magnetic, womanizing son of Judge Cavanaugh. In the space of only several minutes Mr Hall successfully delineates the attractive but reckless Chauncey, giving the keen impression that there was a lot more to this wealthy bad boy that could have been explored than what was presented in his limited screen time.
Soundtrack: The film's theme song, utilized during the opening credits, is a sweeping piece that perfectly sets a solemn, thoughtful tone for the movie. THE LEARNING TREE's other musical pieces played throughout its running time emphasise what is taking place on screen in an appropriate, stirring, but never overpowering manner.
Mise-en-scene: THE LEARNING TREE is lushly photographed by Burnett Guffey, taking full advantage of the film's predominately outdoor scenes. The stream in which the boys swim and certain other events occur, the quiet country roads, the grassy fields, and the picnic, for example, are all captured beautifully by the cinematographer. Interior sets also work well, and express in a subtle manner about the characters and their socio-economic level.
While the family home of Newt is comfortable and warm, it can be contrasted with the more elegant residence of Judge Cavanaugh, with its expensive furniture and accoutrements. Both of these can be differentiated from the gritty, dark sets that Booker Savage and son Marcus inhabit in the film, which have a total lack of warmth, and homeliness. In addition to these, other sets such as the church interiors, and the ice cream parlour, exude veracity, adding realism and dimension to the film.
Award-worthy performances in my opinion: Kyle Johnson, Estelle Evans, Alex Clarke, Dana Elcar, Richard Ward, David Zooey Hall, Russell Thorson.
Suitability for young viewers: No. Brief male and female nudity, adult themes, medium-level violence.
Title: THE YOUNG ANIMALS (Alternate title BORN WILD)
Year of Release: 1968
Director: Maury Dexter
Genre: Drama, Action, Revenge
Synopsis: When a Mexican student arrives at a predominately white high school, discovering racism prolific in nature, he sets about to correct this inequity, but, encounters difficulties in his quest.
Within a film history context: Movies centred around racial problems among high school students are periodically featured in film history. One of the first motion pictures to deal with racism in a multi-racial school was Richard Brooks' THE BLACKBOARD JUNGLE (1955). Seminal in its use of rock music and portrayal of violence, it set a benchmark for more authentic depictions of high school in cinema in that time. TO SIR, WITH LOVE (1967), directed by James Clavell, was another film that dealt with a tenuous high school situation, with a Black African teacher assigned to head a class of disparate students. Paul Bogart's HALLS OF ANGER (1970) was interesting in that the racial scales were tipped on this occasion; in this film the majority of students were African-American, with a Caucasian student minority. Similar to TO SIR, WITH LOVE, in HALLS OF ANGER there was a Black teacher who also encountered difficulties with the students and staff at the school but on this occasion, there were also other black members of staff serving as romantic interest.
In comparison to these, THE YOUNG ANIMALS was reminiscent of HALLS OF ANGER in that the majority of students, in its case, were white, while the Mexican students were the focus of racism this time. It also diverted from the other films in that it did not have a teacher in a main role, instead students were the protagonists who drove the action in the narrative. Another difference is that THE YOUNG ANIMALS had an arch-villain who was a student, making the film more along the lines of a revenge story than a thorough-going exploration of high school issues. What also marked THE YOUNG ANIMALS from the other movies was its focus on action, which made it a more escapist, adventure-oriented entry than the others, which had a higher concentration on character-driven drama.
Overview: Maury Dexter directed twenty-two films in his ten year career in motion pictures, with a heavy emphasis on action and adventure genres. Beginning with WALK TALL in 1960 and his final film, A BULLET FOR PRETTY BOY in 1970, Mr Dexter also explored such themes as obsession, racism, narcotics, and gang violence in his movies. In THE YOUNG ANIMALS Mr Dexter has assembled a film that is sound overall, particularly strong in the confrontation and action sequences but, with some deficiencies. The film moves at a fast rate, which is an asset in that it never becomes stagnant, with something always taking place. The fast pace is a liability when it comes to certain plot points that could have been explored more intensely, and improved the film as a whole. One example stands out in the film for its omission.
The rape in the film is dealt with, and has consequences, but the character of Raquel, with the exception of one scene, is not allowed to express deeper feelings about it. She is shown to be around other male characters in the movie who, while not violent in any manner, still would have reasonably caused the character discomfort and anxiety. While it is a major plot point that the revelation of the rape has repercussions later in the movie, there is no sense that this event has caused a change in the relationship of Paco and Raquel, something which would have given the film even more impetus. Another point is the presence of female and male characters in the movie, and the importance given to its female cast. The female characters are largely secondary in nature to the male characters, and this is another drawback to the film. The actresses in THE YOUNG ANIMALS deserved further showcasing than they received, and this would have resulted in a more balanced film than what eventuated. Despite these flaws, Mr Dexter has done a very good job in other areas.
The riot scenes in front of the school are well-directed, Mr Dexter keeping these effective with a lack of overt bloodshed and gore. Raquel's rape, and Paco being overtaken by the four thugs is also dramatic, with what not being depicted in terms of the inevitable violence making the segment stronger. Action scenes such as Din-Din on the front of the car, and the chase through a caryard are also compelling, and further the plot in suitable ways. In summing up THE YOUNG ANIMALS, Mr Dexter has done sound work with the film overall, but, it needed certain scenes of intimate revelations, and interactions between the characters which would have deepened the film's impact.
Acting: THE YOUNG ANIMALS is a film where the acting is one of its strongest aspects. The movie is also notable in that the male characters are differentiated from each other, which provides colour and drama to the proceedings. As Tony, the pacifist high school student who believes in peace, and attempting for all sides to find conciliation in conflicts, the role is played with believability and charm by Tom Nardini. An agreeable and calming presence as a performer, his charisma works well to centre the film, and expound its theme of violence begets violence. The lively Keith Taylor has some scene-stealing work as the most vulnerable of the quartet of aggressors. Even though his actions are reprehensible in the movie, Mr Taylor manages to give the character a pathos, and humour, that makes him a watchable figure.
David Macklin as the clean-cut, good-looking but heartless Bruce Tabor, who sets the film's events in motion, and head instigator of the racism in the film, offers a chilling portrayal of entitlement and privilege gone wrong. The scenes in which he commits the most heinous of acts are carried off excellently by Mr Macklin, his reactions to the aftermath of his crimes making him one of the best villains of 1960s cinema. As Paco in THE YOUNG ANIMALS, David Zooey Hall offers a wonderful performance as the angry, vengeful but passionate young man who is the film's study in contrasts to Tony. Hearing Mr Hall speaking Spanish with such verve is just one of the reasons that this is a singular experience to treasure, and also why it is the film's best, most complex, and exciting performance. On the other hand, the female characters, specifically Patty McCormack and Joanna Frank, whilst good players, are not given enough scope in the film. I would have liked to have seen more of both, Joanna Frank in particular, as I feel there was more that could have been done to showcase her acting abilities further in the film.
Soundtrack: The movie's soundtrack is a jazzy score that is utilized both at the film's introduction, ending, with variations through its running time. It is particularly effective during the movie's most dramatic moments, highlighting these in a suitably tense manner. Apart from this, the film also features two scenes with rock music, one in a club performed by the American Revolution group, and another during a pool party by Orphan Egg, that work to provide the film with a funky, vibrant 1960s aura.
Mise-en-scene: THE YOUNG ANIMALS is well-produced in terms of its sets and locations. The vast majority of scenes are performed outdoors, and this gives the happenings a freshness and realism that works for the film as a whole. Scenes such as the riot episodes, the chase through the caryard, and Din-Din's torturous ride on the car bonnet, to name several examples, could not be shot as successfully in a studio setting, and would have seemed false. Use of colour in the film is not gaudy but appropriate to what is taking place on screen, the colour tones just right.
Award-worthy performances in my opinion: David Zooey Hall, David Macklin, Tom Nardini, Keith Taylor.
Suitability for young viewers: No. Adult themes, medium-level violence.
Today
I have the great pleasure of welcoming a very special guest, actor David Zooey
Hall, to CINEMATIC REVELATIONS for an interview. David has acted in various
motion pictures and television series over the years, most notably in feature
films THE YOUNG ANIMALS (1968), FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES (1971) [My review of the film can be found here] I DISMEMBER MAMA
(1972), HIT (1973) and 99 and 44/100% DEAD! (1974), to name a few examples.
David will be discussing his role in FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES, acting, jazz music, and his teaching position in The Actor’s Sanctuary, a school for aspiring
actors.
Welcome
to CINEMATIC REVELATIONS David!
Athan:
When did you first realize that you wanted to be an actor?
David:
I think it was there from the beginning. Weekends as a child, my brothers,
sister, cousins and I ( 10 to 15 of us) would get together and go see movies.
And then afterward we’d try to recreate the films we’d seen. The fun we had
made an indelible impression.
*
Athan:
Where did you study acting?
David:
In Los Angeles. With Jeff Corey, Charles Conrad & Donna Gerard. The teacher
from whom I learned the most though was Gordon Hunt. He was the Casting
Director at The Mark Taper Forum located @ The Music Center in Los Angeles.Also a Director (Theatre and Voice over). His
daughter is the actor Helen Hunt. I enrolled in his class to continue studying
Acting. Which led me into Directing, Writing, and then Teaching. At one point Gordon was asked by a playwright
whose first play he had directed, to direct that writer’s newest play. He
wasn’t available because he was directing another play, and he suggested the
writer contact me, which he did. We met and he offered me his play to direct.
Some of the other students in class had been asking me to direct some of the
work they were putting up in class, and I’d been doing that, but I’d not really
thought about directing, per se. I asked Gordon to fill me in on what I’d be
taking on to direct a play and he replied: “You’re already doing in class what’ll
be required of you as a Director.” So, I agreed to direct the play. It was well
received. One of the folks who saw it was the head of a Playwriting Group, who
was also a playwright. He asked me to direct a play he had recently written. I
read it, found it interesting, and agreed to direct it. The results were such
that he began sending me a great many of the scripts from his writing unit.
None of which I was interested in directing. Which then prompted me to begin
writing my own first effort as a playwright: “Taproot.” Written in Gordon’s class. My intention when I finished the play was to find a theatre where I could
get it produced and also direct it. I submitted the play to the Cast Theatre in
Hollywood, at the time the most successful Equity Waiver theatre in Hollywood.
Out of fourteen hundred submissions the year it was submitted, “Taproot” was
one of seven plays chosen that year for a Main Stage production. When I told Ted
Schmidt, the Artistic Director the of the Cast Theatre and Diana Gibson ( the
Dramaturge ) that I was also interested in directing the play, they
told me they already had a director in mind for it and that the play would be
produced at the Cast only if I agreed to play the lead role. I wanted the play
to be produced, and The Cast Theatre had a great reputation and following, so I
agreed to act in it. When the director they chose left the production shortly
after it opened to direct another play, I took over the direction myself and
redirected the play according to the way I had originally intended it be
performed. “Taproot” was extended three times beyond its originally scheduled run.
The play was then submitted to the Landmark Red Barn Theatre in Pittsburgh which was looking for an original play for their upcoming season, and “Taproot” was
selected. After it opened in Pittsburgh I was contacted regarding having it
produced in New York City.
Shortly
after this Gordon Hunt asked me if I’d be interested in working with actors who
were on a waiting list to enter his class? I told him I didn’t think I was
interested in teaching. He suggested I give it some thought. I did and decided
I’d give it a try. Soon the class expanded beyond Mr. Hunt’s waiting list to
include other actors interested in joining the class. Then I quit teaching to
spend six months in New York. When I returned to Los Angeles I resumed the
class. This time it doubled in size. Again, about a year and a half later I was
asked to return to NYC to look into business contacts there. This time I was
gone a year. During that year I discovered I missed Teaching. And decided that if any of the students who
were in the class when I left, had waited
for me to resume the class after a year, I’d continue the class as long as
there was an interest in my doing that. The Actors Sanctuary continues up to
the present time.
*
Athan:
I found your performance in FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES a spellbinding viewing
experience. How did you become involved in this project?
David:
I was flown up to Quebec City, Canada to audition for the role of Rocky. I had
heard there had been casting sessions for the role in Hollywood, New York City
and London, and that at the moment there was “No Rocky.” There were four leads
in the film. All but the role of Rocky had been cast and were in rehearsals for
two weeks, when I arrived. I’d read the script on the plane to Quebec City.
When I arrived at the prison which was to be the location for the film, I read
with Wendell Burton (who played Smitty in the film) for the role of Rocky. And
was offered the role. After the audition, the folks in the room during the
audition left to continue their duties elsewhere and I was left with the one of
the producers, Lester Persky, who asked me if I was aware of the nudity that
would be required for the rape scene between Smitty and Rocky? I responded that
I had read the script on the plane and hadn’t seen any indication of that in
the script. He said that aspect of the film was yet to be implemented into the
script, and that it was integral to the film. I placed the script back on Mr.
Persky’s desk and started to leave the room. As I got to the door he asked me
where I was going and I told him: “I’m returning to Los Angeles. I’m not going
to do your film.” I then called for a cab and was waiting for it out on the
entrance steps to the prison when Mr. Persky came out and said to me: “Don’t
leave…we’ll find a way to work things out.” He handed the script back to me. I
took it ,and decided a short meeting with Wendell Burton might be the next
order of business.
*
Athan:
What was it like filming FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES in Canada, in which seemed to
be a very cold winter?
David:
Yes, at one point it was twenty five below zero. I ended up in the Hospital on
three different occasions (lacerated hand, head wound, ruptured kidney / kidney
stone). The first night after I was cast in the film I asked to spend the night
in one of the prison cells. A long night in which I had a dream in which I was
incarcerated & living for one thing – escape. The film began shooting in late
October. And continued for the next four and a half months. As the Holiday
season approached, I read in a newspaper that the worst time for someone in
prison was Christmas. The film was to break for two weeks over Christmas and
New Year. I‘d been receiving invitations from folks working on the film to
spend Christmas with them, which I’d declined, without knowing exactly why. And
then It hit me that I’d never have a better chance to find out if what I had
read in the newspaper about Christmas being the worst time for someone incarcerated
was true or not. I decided to find out. The film had shut down for the
holidays, and everyone connected with it had scattered except for Security
personnel at the prison. On the late afternoon of December 24, I took a cab to
the Prison entrance and asked the Security Guard on duty who spoke in broken
English to be let into one of the Solitary Confinement cells which were located
two floors beneath the main floor of the prison. I showed my identification
card verifying that I was one of the actors in the film being shot there, and
asked the guard to let me out on Christmas Day. I also asked to be locked into
the cell, with just a pillow, blanket, and container of water. Which is all a
prisoner in Solitary confinement is allowed. The Guard said I’d be let out on Christmas
Day, as I requested. After his shift ended that night I found out later he went
off to a ski resort to celebrate Christmas with his family, and forgot he had
locked someone into one of the cells. Two and a half days later he remembered
and called the guard who had replaced him on Christmas Eve and told him one of
the actors in the film was locked in one of the Solitary confinement cells and
needed to be released immediately. Christmas morning, expecting to be released, I
had waited until the dime holes in the prison door began to darken that mid
afternoon on Christmas Day, before calling out to be released. Did that until I
had no voice. Did that until I literally began to fear for my life. What had
begun as a bit of research for a role I was portraying became along the way, in
some of the moments I experienced - a nightmare.
I ran out of water during the first night, and
the fact that I had nothing to drink for the next two and a half days and
nights caused me several weeks later to develop a kidney stone. That happened
while I was spending ten days in a hospital recovering from a kidney I had
ruptured in a fight scene for the film. All my remaining scenes, including the
rape scene, were pushed back to the end of the shooting schedule.
*
Athan:
You and Wendell Burton shared an intense connection as Rocky and Smitty in
FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES. What was it like filming these complex,
multi-dimensional scenes in the film as part of an acting ensemble?
David:
Immediately after my being cast as Rocky, and then following the conversation with
Lester Persky about the nudity in the film, I met with Wendell Burton and told
him that after my conversation with Lester Persky that I was pretty sure that
the film had been sold to M-G-M on the condition that it would be the first
time the male sex act was to be graphically depicted in a film produced by a
major motion picture studio. And that Persky had indicated to me that the rape
scene we were to film together would require total nudity. I asked Wendell if
he’d been told this? He said he hadn’t. I asked him how he felt about it? He said
nobody had said anything to him. Then added: “ I sure as Hell wouldn’t want my
grandmother seeing me doing something like that onscreen!” I then said to him:
“I know we’ve just met, but I’ve got an idea…if you don’t mind me throwing
something into the mix?” He said: “Not at all – shoot.” I said “Let’s tell the
producers (Lester Persky and Lewis Allen) and the director (Jules Schwerin)
that we’re fine with doing the rape scene but want to have it pushed back two
or three weeks to get a feel for the film, for working together, and to
establish the relationship between the two characters we’re portraying. And if
we can do that, by the time we get to the rape scene there will be several weeks
of film already shot and in the can and we might be able to exert some pressure
to have the scene filmed in a way we’re both comfortable with. And if they're not open to this - we can flat out refuse to do the scene. And we'll see what happens then." Wendell enthusiastically
agreed to this, and that became the plan.
When
the day arrived to film the rape scene Lester Persky asked to meet with Wendell and I before filming was to
begin that morning and said that the Rape scene scheduled for this day was to
be filmed in total nudity for both Rocky and Smitty. To which both Wendell and I
both responded: “We’re not going to do it that way.” Persky then called the director
Jules Schwerin in to join him in the meeting he was having with us and we
repeated to him what we had said to Persky.Production immediately came to a halt. M-G-M, the studio producing the film was
contacted, and Herb Solow (Head of Production for M-G-M) flew to the Prison and
met with the producers, and the director of the film. That meeting resulted in
the director (Mr. Schwerin) being fired and replaced by Harvey Hart. Oncethe new director was in place, the meetings
ended, and Mr. Solow returned to M-G-M. Before beginning filming Harvey Hart
asked to meet with Wendell Burton and I. When we got together he asked us how
we saw the film but before answering his question, Wendell and I had a question
for him: We asked if he thought the film had been “green lighted” because of
the potential it contained to exploit the sexual element of prison life? He
said “Yes.” And then he added that not being able to deliver that particular element
of the film was the reason Jules Schwerin had been fired. Wendell and I both
said neither of us wanted to make that kind of film.Harvey then said that since the sexual element
was a part of prison life, that some of it would have to be in the film, but
that he was also against it being the central element of the film, or
sensationalizing it. He also said that he thought we could make a more honest
film without exploiting the sex angle and that he wanted to make the same kind
of film that it sounded to him that we were interested in making. He ended the
meeting with: “Fellahs – let’s make the film WE want to make. If M-G-M doesn’t
like what we’re doing – they can fire me, too.” To that end he decided to scrap
what had been filmed before he came aboard and reshot the film entirely. From
that moment on filming “Fortune And Men’s Eyes “ became for me - a creative
adventure.
*
Athan:
What did you most enjoy about the experience of filming FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES?
David:
Sometimes I think - just surviving it. John Herbert had written the play. And
it appeared that in the shooting script I received after my audition, that the character
of Rocky had remained completely unchanged from the original theatre
production, while the other three lead characters had all evolved, been
developed and adapted to make the transition from stage to screen. The day I
was cast in the film I was asked to participate in a “ table read “ of the
script. And found the character of Rocky saddled with dialogue that was antiquated,
superfluous, dated. I asked to get as much of it removed as possible. Jules
Schwerin, the first director of the film, allowed me to do the first couple of
scenes he filmed of me as Rocky improvising my own dialogue instead of using
what was in the script. After he saw the dailies of what he had shot, and heard
the dialogue I had improvised, he allowed me to continue doing that. When Harvey Hart took over directing the film he
told me that when he had first read the script, he had noticed the dialogue for
Smitty, Queenie and Mona all sounded contemporary and natural, but that Rocky’s
dialogue: “sounded like something out of a film about the “Dead End Kids.” He
also said that “When I saw the dailies of what had been shot, I noticed you
weren’t saying what was in the script, that you were improvising your own
dialogue as well as some of the action, and what I heard and saw - rang
true to me. And that’s when I decided that once we began to work together, I’d
let you continue to do exactly what you were doing.” And that’s pretty much
what happened once we began to work together. When a scene was scheduled that I
was in, he’d come into my room before filming was to begin and ask “What
happens to Rocky now? Where does he go, what does he do next, and what’s the
action that takes place?” I’d give him my thoughts. He’d listen and we proceeded
from there. Once I told Harvey what I thought Rocky might do next, he’d ask me:
“Where do you think is going to be the best place to put the camera, and how many
cameras are going to be needed to cover this next scene the way you want to
play it?” He allowed me complete freedom
to improvise not only my dialogue but the action of my character in every scene
I was in, and this is how we continued to work together for the remainder of
the film. This kind of creative freedom wasn’t
something I had asked for. Harvey said that after watching the dailies, he just
had the feeling that this would simply be the best way for he and I to work
together. It was a way of working together - determined by necessity. It wasn’t
until Harvey Hart came onboard as director of the film that I began to feel as
though I might have someone in the production of the film that I could trust.
*
Athan:
What impact did acting in FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES have on yourself as a person?
David:
It validated my interest in taking risks as an actor. As well as my desire to
have my work as an actor be – of service to others. On the plane to Quebec City
I remember, as I was reading the script, feeling as though “ I was being called
out, ” in terms of the kind of actor I would be: conventional (meaning safe) or
otherwise, in terms of the roles I was willing to take on. I remember thinking:
“What’ll I do if I’m offered the role of Rocky - a character from another part
of the forest than I’mfamiliar with?”
What came to me then was that perhaps, if the film itself were to be handled in
a certain way, it could possibly shed light on certain elements of the prison system
that desperately needed – change – that might bring about helpfulness and healing
instead of inflicting damage and addiction to a life of crime - on those
incarcerated. This seemed to me to be a worthwhile reason to involve myself
with the film. I found myself too, at that moment, looking for someone whose
acting career might be an example for me of how to manage my own career in the face
of the particular challenge that seemed to be presenting itself to me – and
found no one. I remember feeling that the step I am about to take
creatively…professionally, is one I’m going to have to take – alone. It really
wasn’t until some years later that the example I’d looked for on “Fortune” -
suddenly appeared, when I saw Tom Hanks in the motion picture “Philadelphia.” He played a gay man dying of Aids and won the
Academy Award that year for Best Performance by an Actor for his work in the
film. I remember watching the film and feeling : “There it is – the Permission
I’d wished I’d had on “Fortune - that was non-existent at that time. After
seeing that film I thought to myself: “ Actors are free now! To play whatever
kinds of roles are offered to them, whatever kinds of roles they may create or seek
to bring to life - whatever kinds of roles their talent may be inspired to
reach for.”
Personally,
when “Fortune And Men’s Eyes” opened, the feedback that my performance as Rocky
in the film generated that meant the most to me – came from my fellow actors.
Intuitively perhaps, on some level they may have sensed the chance I’d taken by
accepting the role of Rocky, whether I had succeeded or not – to strike out on
a path where there did not seem to be at that time – another traveler.
*
Athan:
Did filming FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES make you see jail and the prisoners who live
in these facilities in a different light than you first imagined?
David:
No, because I had read about the prison system. But it brought the loss of my
own freedom home to me in a more personal way because of the couple of
accidents that happened to me along the way of making the film.
*
Athan:
Have you kept in contact with any cast members and crew from FORTUNE AND MEN’S
EYES?
David:
No. Unfortunately, Wendell Burton, Michael Greer, Harvey Hart and both
Producers Lewis Allen and Lester Persky are no longer with us. A couple of
years after the filmhad opened,
Wendell, with whom I had always got along well, invited me to his first
wedding, which took place in Griffith Park in Los Angeles. It was a lovely
ceremony. Shortly after that Wendell and his wife moved out of California. I
never saw them again. I heard later he had become a “Born Again Christian:”
performing Christian music concerts, recording & touring.
*
Athan:
Are you still recognized today for your role in FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES?
David:
Yes. Quite honestly and it’s just one person’s opinion: because M-G-M did not
get exactly the kind of film they anticipated when they purchased the rights to
film it, they never had a clue as to how to promote it. The very week that
“Fortune And Men’s Eyes” opened, the Attica Prison Riot occurred (1971). That
kind of coincidence or synchronicity might have been a gold mine in the hands
of another motion picture studio than M-G-M. A couple of years later, I went to
Europe on a film. Prior to that I had had no real idea of how powerfully the
film had resonated with the public internationally until I began shooting in
France, and then Italy. In Italy I learned that huge crowds had swarmed all the
venues there where the film had played, because the Italian public knew that
the Catholic Church would do everything in its power to get the film banned as
soon as it could after it opened, wherever it opened. I heard too, that
wherever it had played in Europe, it had caused a sensation.
*
Athan:
Just out of interest, but are you left-handed? I noticed that in FORTUNE AND
MEN’S EYES you did many things this way, such as eating and throwing items.
Being left-handed, I like to see which actors are the same.
David:
Yes, I’m a Southpaw.
*
Athan:
Of all your movies, which was your personal favorite movie acting role?
David:
Fortune And Men’s Eyes.
*
Athan:
You have been teaching acting to students for many years now in THE ACTOR’S
SANCTUARY. What gives you the most satisfaction about teaching the art of
acting to students?
David:
A couple of things: In order to conduct The Actors Sanctuary I’ve found I must
continue studying, learning, growing, too. Otherwise I have nothing to give. Also:
if someone comes to me asking me for help, and if there is some way I may be
able to offer that, well, just speaking for myself - what else am I living for?
The best teacher it seems to me – is life itself. My favorite kind of acting
looks like - life, and not like “acting.” I hesitate to use the word Teacher
referring to myself. It’s dishonest in my opinion. Because I consider myself a
student: first, foremost, lastly. There is a certain kind of satisfaction in
guiding, encouraging and simply working with others. And hopefully, watching
them grow. Another satisfaction is hearing from one of the students that something
we’ve worked on together in class has helped them in an audition or in a role
they have been hired to perform.
*
Athan:
What attracted you to jazz music and performing this for audiences?
David:
The vulnerability of being in the moment, with nothing to hide behind (sheer
terror when one begins that particular journey). Exactly the same “calling”
that resides at the center of a certain kind of acting. Acting and Singing I
find to be interrelated. And it’s why we do both in The Actors Sanctuary. It’s
impossible to hide from the camera. Same for a singer in front of a live
audience. I’m not sure this will make any sense, but I’ll give it a shot anyway:
to me now -being completely alone feels
to me to be pretty much the same experience as acting in front of a camera or
singing in front of a live audience. Once it didn’t. Now it does. I don’t know
why.
*
Athan:
Have you released a CD of your music?
David:
Not formally. But I’ve recorded a CD. A live recording of the second Jazz gig I
was hired for: “David Hall: Live @ Geri’s Jazz World.”
*
Thank
you so much today for your time David, and for the fascinating insight you have
provided into the art of acting, film, FORTUNE AND MEN’S EYES, and jazz music.
It has been wonderful to have you on CINEMATIC REVELATIONS. You are welcome to
return whenever you wish.
