This week, I was fortunate enough to be able to talk to Chris Morris over the phone and discuss his film Four Lions, why terrorists are funny, the themes behind the movie, as well as the reaction he has seen towards it. See the full transcript below the jump.

So I’d like to start with your inspiration for the film. I read that you did a lot of research following the 7/7 bombings. Could you just talk about your process writing the script?

“I was actually reading the subject before the July 7th bombings in London, but those certainly didn’t deter me. I suppose they actually threw up quite a lot more detail on the subject. But I was just reading into it, and kept being surprised, finding things that were funny when they shouldn’t be. I wasn’t looking for humor, I was looking for information. And the first one that hit me, and you’ve probably seen me refer to this before, but I can’t change the fact that it was the first one that struck me, was the story about some Yemeni jihadists who were going to blow up an American warship by ramming it with an exploding boat. They ended up putting the boat in the water and they filled it with explosives and it sank. And I thought, ‘That’s just slightly ridiculous.’ They all would’ve had a pretty strong view on that and I don’t think they would’ve agreed on whose fault it was. And that seemed like the origin of a funny scene in a film. I didn’t really think anymore about it. And then, by-and-by, funny incidents would just keep suggesting themselves as part of a pattern. Be it Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the guy who planned the 9/11 attack, wasting two hours before a TV interview trying to select costumes that didn’t make him look fat, trying to get Koranic quotes out when he was actually being interviewed and messing them all up time and again and having to re-tape them, a Canadian cell who wanted to assassinate the Canadian Prime Minister then forgot who he was, a group designed a remote-control detonator to protect themselves from the effects of their own bomb but it had a range of ten feet. These things just started to form a pattern, and by the time I was looking at the surveillance transcripts of a cell that was related to the ones that had successfully bombed London (but this lot failed and were arrested before they did anything) the evidence became a cascade. It was just example after example of people being, at best, average. And in those circumstances, you’re only gonna get a few through. And the more people I spoke to, whether it was people who had friends or cousins who’d been to training camp, or whether it was people who worked in the emergency services, or assorted police, or kind-of terrorism advisors, they said the same thing. This is what they see and this is what they hear on intercept. It’s called by intelligence people the bunch-of-guys theory, which says that you’re gonna have an average bunch of guys involved in this and that’s exactly how it manifests itself, with mistakes and arguments. A kind of bond between them all, but like a squabbling group of friends or a stag party or a five-side football team or something, you know the kind of unity and sort of division. That is confirmed in books, too. Marc Sageman wrote a book called Understanding Terror Networks, in which he describes precisely this. Anytime we screened for police counter-terrorism departments or people involved in similar sorts of facilities, they just nodded in recognition and started adding to the stories themselves. So that seems to me to be a pretty good basis for actually making a film of this sort–which didn’t ignore the seriousness of what these guys were doing but showed different aspects of how they do it than the one you would get in the news.”

Yeah, and when you watch the film, it seems like, “Oh, these are the outliers. These are terrorists, but they’re bumbling fools.” But in reality, that’s probably closer to the truth than  these suave super-spies from action movies.

“Yeah, they don’t work like they do in action movies but they aren’t all sort of running around falling over. It’s somewhere in between. There was a guy recently whose job it was to assassinate a Saudi prince by blowing himself up with a suppository bomb. He duly stuffed the bomb up his orifice and went to see the Saudi prince, and he said, ‘Hello, Prince,’ and pulled out his detonator and hit the button, firing himself straight through the ceiling of the tent, without harming the prince at all. So, he kind of turned into a human bottle rocket. And that, to me, is every bit as stupid as Faisal jumping over a wall and blowing up a sheep. I mean, it’s like something out of the bloody Marx brothers. So it just seems to be a good side of this process to show. Much as you get films like Dog Day Afternoon, showing a kind of plotsy siege, and what happens when that goes wrong. You do sometimes get films about soldiers getting things wrong, so right across the board you will have people not doing things perfectly. That’s all it is.”

Now, when you had the idea for this “terrorist comedy”, you had worked a lot on the radio and TV. Why did this stick out to you as a film, and not, for example, a TV special?

“Well, I suppose it could be a TV special, to be perfectly honest. I mean, the dynamics wouldn’t have been that  different. I think it was inevitably going to be a three-act structure, so it was going to be film length but the difference between it being a TV special and being a film is very slight. It’s merely a case of certain things you do will be enhanced by the fact that it is on the big screen. I think that allows you a different rhythmic space sometimes–you can travel in a different way in the cinema as compared to how you do when you’re watching the television. But with something like this, which is dialogue heavy, the differences are not as dramatic as they would be if you were doing a visual poem.”

So you have this idea and you’ve written it and you’re trying to get funding, and I know that several distributors turned you down,  because they just didn’t think the controversy was worth it–

“You mean in the States?”

Yes.

“Look, people know absolutely nothing about this subject, other than that they think it’s trouble. So they have very, very little to go on and they make very little effort to change that. So you’re dealing with a massive amount of ignorance. And that’s across the globe, that’s in Britain, too. People are staggeringly ignorant about something which is, apart from anything else, commanding rather a lot of their own money, by all the tax that they pay into the coffers that their governments spend. So I wasn’t that surprised because I knew that to be the case anyway but that’s really what, I think, produced reticence on the whole. And when people came forward, it was either because they had a bolder imagination, or they knew a little bit more. Wild Bunch (they were the overseas sales agent) got involved in funding the film because of the first two people I spoke to, one of them came from Lebanon and the other one was a quarter Pakistani who’d grown up in Britain. So they knew the landscape a lot better and they didn’t have this sort of neurotic convulsion about it. But as soon as you don’t know anything, the chances are you’re gonna make a bit of a burke of yourself.”

So, people really found you–you didn’t have to sell any distributor that didn’t want to have anything to do with it.

“Well, no. I had to pitch to people and just hope that a certain number of them would stick with it. You know, we ended up getting our money from Film4 who partly fund films, we got some money up front from our own distributors in Britain, we got some money from private individuals, a sort of consortium of private individuals who wanted to invest in the film for various reasons, and we sort of hammered it together that way. And then, in terms of American distribution, I think it was just that Tom Quinn from Magnolia and Tim League from Drafthouse Alamo found themselves having a conversation about the film in which they basically agreed about it and decided to go into partnership to distribute it. Maybe they were already talking about going into partnership and they just thought, ‘This is the one.’ So, they were from two different companies and they agreed to go forward together. Sometimes we’d have  a multitude of people within one distribution company and they couldn’t get their heads around it collectively. Some people would go one way and some people would go another way.”

As you know, the main focus of the media is over the controversy of laughing at something that’s really a serious subject, but I think we’ve covered that time and time again with every controversial comedy. Did you have any worries that you wouldn’t get any support for the film, or people would just be offended, or did you just not care?

“Well, funny enough, I didn’t care very much about whether people would be offended. I never do, but I did know that this would be unlikely to be offensive in the same way that other things I’ve done have been. Because it’s taking a very different approach, I mean, I think the film is more subtly offensive to someone whose opinions are very hardwired and crystallized but it’s not offensive to the sensibilities of people who mind about bombs. I think it does take the effects of those seriously. What it’s undermining are preconceptions. After all, a subject like terrorism which involves a shocking manifestation in its primary form is hardly worth trying to shock people about. You know what I mean? You try to shock people when they’re smug about something.”

Well, especially towards the end, people start blowing up left and right so it definitely takes the bombs themselves seriously. How did you get an audience to go along with main characters exploding themselves?

“Well, I think they’re buying into the fact that some of these people behave more reasonably than others. And so you gravitate towards people who feel more reasonable. And why wouldn’t you? I mean, that happens in real life. The people who get involved with these plots are not all insanely unreasonable. Sometimes they’re very reasonable people. And although the film is not a polemical film, (I don’t really think polemic film is really the place for polemic, I think it tends to kill us all) the implication from the behavior of these people is that, worryingly, some of them get to their decision through reasonable means. And I think that is a challenge. It’s much easier to say they’re all brainwashed and they’re all extreme, sort of, I don’t know, monochromatically evil people whose moral compass lies completely outside our own. But that isn’t true.”

Yeah. It’s always easier to blame all these attacks on just one crazy individual. When you realize there’s an entire group, no matter how small it may be, of people who have reasons for why they’re doing what they’re doing, that’s much more of a serious threat.

“Yeah I mean, the reasons vary. And I think, in ourselves, the reasons vary. You know, Barry is an out-and-out nihilist and I don’t think his position demands to be taken very seriously. Omar, on the other hand, thinks he’s doing the right thing and I think that does demand to be taken seriously. “

Now, after you released the movie, did you have any groups who were openly hostile to it or any censorship problems?

“We did have a couple of funders who wanted to change the ending but we didn’t have any censorship problems as such. And, in terms of people being angry, I mean, no. We had a pretty broad church of nodded approval. People really enjoyed the film. Right from, sort of, soldiers who lost friends in suicide bombings and military campaigns through police (We were invited to screen for the Anti-Terror Police in the States and they all were laughing their heads off.) right through to people, Muslims and, indeed, radicals. I spoke to a guy during the research who actually fought alongside Osama Bin Laden against the Russians, in what you might call the good old days in the Mujahideen, and he subsequently distanced himself from Bin Laden when he said that it was a good idea to start blowing up civilians and this guy profoundly disagreed. He loved the film and thought it perfectly portrayed the sort of the abstract extrapolation that these lads sitting in British cities can try to achieve in order to carry out their insanely destructive acts. Right across the board, there were people laughing but I read a review from a guy in South Africa who gave it naught out of ten and said, ‘I hated every second,’ so there must be people who feel like that. I think the people who find it hardest are those people who come to the film requiring it to be something of their own devising and then find out that it’s something of somebody else’s devising. In some way they’re not prepared to cross the gap. I heard one guy on a review show saying, ‘Well, it’s all very well, of course, but what happens in the film is essentially nothing like what happens in real life.’ He was a sort of blustering politician. Next to him was sitting a terrorism expert who said, ‘Well, if I can say one thing about the film, it is that it entirely reflects what happens in real life.’ But not everybody has the luxury of sitting next to somebody in the cinema who might say that to them. But then at our screenings in the States nobody came up and said, ‘That was rubbish.’”

Obviously because it’s a comedy I think a lot of people will walk away thinking, ‘Oh, that was a great twist on real terrorists, but they’re completely different from that.’ I think it’s closer to real life than people think and I guess that’s to your credit for doing all the research that you did.

“Well look, you know, if you don’t know this subject particularly well, then you could be forgiven for wondering how true this stuff was, but you have to wait until you know before you decide. So, if you find it extraordinary to behold, you might go away and find out a bit. If you sort of think, ‘That couldn’t be true, that kind of stuff, that couldn’t be-”

And then they find out that it actually is.

“Yeah, but also don’t forget that the film isn’t showing them as one hundred percent incompetent. I mean, they get into trouble, and there’s internal strife, but there’s also a striving to try and do the right thing. There’s even the operation of a kind of conscience at play, which is certainly demonstrated by Omar and Wyatt right at the start. They think they’re going off to Pakistan to learn to do the right thing and there’s that scene where Omar says, ‘You do the right thing. When God asks you bro, you do the right thing. If you’d have to kill, you’d have to kill me. I’d have to kill you, You know, this is real.’ And they have that ridiculous conversation in the back of the shop with the chickens. But they’re forging a head on a sort of a blood bond, which is lethal and moral and that comes into play later in the film. And if somebody thinks, ‘Well, it can’t be anything like this,’ they should have a look at the record.”

With the film, would you say you’re primary goal, first of all, is just for it to be funny?

“Well I wouldn’t have done it if the incidents in real life hadn’t suggested a funny film. That seemed to me to be the interesting thing about it, was that you‘ve got funny incidents in a context where there really shouldn’t be. So in other words, real life was saying, ‘Look, there it is, right in front of you.’ The court case I was at was referred to by journalists and police alike. Almost to the end of every day, it was like being the Keystone Cops. The stories that were coming out in court were like something from the Keystone Cops and yet, the next day, in the media the only thing that would be reported would be something which endangered the British public. So, you were missing a great deal. It’s not that that wasn’t the case–it’s not that these bombs weren’t discussed, it’s just that there was all this other stuff going on which was keeping everyone in the court amused, but which wasn’t being reported. So, that’s why it felt like it had to come out. I think what I’m trying to do is get that out there. And it’s because it was funny that it struck everyone. So, it had to carry on being funny as it came through the film. That’s the way ‘round it works. And I think, it’s interesting to do, rather than something that’s just sort of a ‘Guess what happened to me today,’ because it undermines preconceptions and I think by undermining preconceptions, it pushes towards, rather than away from, knowledge.”

But then there’s also the scene where Omar’s brother, who is the peaceful one, ends up getting arrested, while meanwhile the main characters go and try to bomb the London Marathon. That was the only really overt message that I saw. The rest, like you said, really just undermines preconceptions and makes you think, and of course laugh a lot.

“Yeah, I mean, look. You would call that scene where Omar’s brother is being interrogated route one satire. And I felt that as a detail in the film that was fine but I didn’t want the whole film to be a route one satire. It’d be predictable. I thought it was more undermining and more interesting to play it this way with satirical elements where required. But, you know, there’s not the space to accurately reflect the book-bending and the verse selection from holy texts which provides the body of underpinning for this kind of behavior so that had to be intuited by the characters and that their faith in doing the right thing on God’s behalf is exactly what all of that ideology says, but in a word. We don’t want to hear a transcript of Abdullah Azzam’s In Defense of Muslim Lands in a film. Well at least I don’t. Similarly, you don’t want to get a whole list of recognizably right-angle satire jokes. But the one where the brother is interrogated in a container, I felt, is pretty indicative of what goes on. You know, after all lot of kids were arrested in Afghanistan and taken to Guantanamo Bay because there was a premium on their heads. People do get arrested and interrogated in a pretty rough way without there being the slightest bit of evidence against them so don’t leave that out. But that’s not the main point of the film.”

Would you consider the movie more a farce, or more a satire?

“Well, I don’t know. Is it a farce? Is it a caper? I mean, it gets to the point where those kind of categorizations are only partial descriptions of what the film is, because it’s–“

It is what it is.

“Well, yeah. Those kind of labels don’t make any sense to me. What exactly is a satire? A satire is something that is humor with a purpose. Do you know what I mean? You could end up fishing for labels for the rest of you life. I didn’t work it that way ‘round, and I wouldn’t define it backwards either. I think you could just kinda say it’s a tragic comedy. I think I’d accept that.”

That makes sense. I thought it was hilarious and I can’t really think of a more accurate definition than that.

“I’m glad! It’s funny, you can get into some fairly stiff conversations about it but I think the experience of people going to see it is in general good. I think their jaw opens and some noise comes out.”

No matter how many people say, ‘Oh, you shouldn’t laugh at something like that,’ they’re gonna laugh.

“Yeah, let’s hope so.”

Thank you for your time, it was great talking to you.

“Not at all. Thanks very much for your interest. And, who knows, we might hang around for a few weeks.”

This post goes out to my girlfriend, it’s got everything she likes- The TODAY Show, Steve Carrel, Tina Fey, Date Night the movie and the date night when we inevitably see the movie. I do think the movie looks entertaining but I also own The Man Who Knew Too Little on DVD so I’m a sucker for “not who you think I am” comedies I just usually rent them, after all how does the big screen enhance “you’ve got us confused with someone else!” *stepping down from soapbox. So Tina Fey of NBC’s best comedy 30 Rock and Steve Carrel of NBC’s former best comedy The Office were on NBC’s TODAY this morning, did any of you see this? Probably not and that’s why you’re here! For this-

I would love for you to share your date night plans to see Date Night with your significant other! I’ll start- Olive Garden for salad and breadsticks then chicken marsala (a couple of Andes mints) and we’re off to the AMC theater at NorthPark! You’re turn!

A Single Man is simply great; everything most critics are saying is one hundred percent true. It’s nothing short of brilliant. If you happen to also be a fan of Colin Firth and Julianne Moore then it’s definitely a must-see — it ranks among their best works. Another reason to see it: Nicholas Hoult. You’re sure to remember him from the fantastic About A Boy and the highly underrated The Weatherman. Now he’s taken on a completely different role and has struck a cord of pure success. Luckily, I was able to do a quick on-phone interview with Nicholas where we mostly discussed the themes of A Single Man and I even got in a few questions about the upcoming remake of Clash of the Titans. As a forewarning though, this interview is filled with heavy spoilers so I recommend reading it after you’ve seen the film. A Single Man is now in theaters and I can’t recommend it enough.

How was the AFI festival?

Nicholas Hoult: It was fantastic, the screening went very well. Everyone went to the Venice and London film festivals with the film and so far all the responses have been fantastic. It’s great because it’s something I’m very proud of.

I noticed Chris Weitz was credited as a producer, was that how you got involved?

Nicholas Hoult: No, it wasn’t. He wasn’t really involved with how I got involved. I just got a call from my agent saying they were casting the next day in L.A. while I was in London. He just said I should get on a plane for this role… So I sent a tape over of me doing a scene and got an email back from Tom [Ford] saying how he liked my audition. It was all a very quick process.

Why do you think George is so infatuated with Kenny?

Nicholas Hoult: I think it’s something to do with how George has been living in the past. He’s lost a loved one, he’s dwelling on it, and [Kenny's] just so full of life and vibrant. Kenny drags him out of it and makes him have fun in life.

Maybe it also had to do with how Kenny is somewhat similar to George. They obviously both pretend to be something they’re not.

Nicholas Hoult: Yeah, they’re both very precise too. Kenny also has this girlfriend who he has a connection with, unlike George.

He’s also the only one who really notices that George is really hurt.

Nicholas Hoult: Yeah, exactly. He’s the only one that notices George wasn’t being himself and that something may not be right. He was the only person looking out for him and he’s kind of like a guardian angel. He just brightens up most of the film and that’s kind of what he symbolizes.

It’s sort of ironic though how Charlie really doesn’t see anything is wrong with him even though she’s known him for quite a long time.

Nicholas Hoult: Yeah, well Charlie is still caught up in the whole idea of them still being a couple.

The relationship Kenny has with that girl is also a little similar to what George had with Charlie when they were young.

Nicholas Hoult: Yeah, definitely. Kenny practically sums it up that he’s not interested by her. I think that’s also where George gets his intrigue from what he’s trying to understand in the world around him: to have a connection with someone. He’s striving to feel life.

You can see that when George is gazing into people’s eyes that he’s trying to make a connection of some kind.

Nicholas Hoult: Yeah, he’s making major connections and seeing new things.

Tom did a great job with having the colors and even the score also represent his emotions.

Nicholas Hoult: He did a great job with adapting the book as well. He did a remarkable job.

Were those techniques in the script?

Nicholas Hoult: No, we weren’t aware of that. That was a nice surprise.

It’s quite beautiful seeing that play out on screen.

Nicholas Hoult: Yeah, it’s a great way portraying how George is feeling with the voiceover and all those sort of things. With the combination of the score and the color separation you can really go on a journey with him. Colin is such a fantastic actor and he really makes you want to feel his emotions.

You never see dramas shot that way either…

Nicholas Hoult: That was obviously one thing everyone knew right at the beginning, that the film would be beautiful. A lot of people probably thought it wouldn’t have the substance to back that up, but gladly they were proven wrong. It’s a very personal story for him and he put a lot of time, effort, and care into it.

The shoot was of course very short, the film had a pretty low budget, and it was obviously aspiring to do so much. Was there any second thought about jumping on?

Nicholas Hoult: There wasn’t really any second thought. People say that… I don’t really understand that bit because it’s an offer to play a great character along with great actors. There was never any hesitation.

I didn’t mean that regarding the story at all, but about how the production was limited and yet it was so ambitious.

Nicholas Hoult: I don’t believe that you need… Sometimes I think there’s a lot wasted during production. I don’t think you need huge budgets and a huge amount of time. It never felt particularly that we were under pressure on this, timewise. Everyone was very happy and we never felt pushed or under pressure. You can’t judge a job by its budget and time.

Death is obviously the running theme throughout the film: coming to terms with it, coping with it, and even the beauty of it. Is there anything particular that you take away from that core theme?

Nicholas Hoult: Yeah, very much… That’s one of the main themes of the film with love, loss, and understanding it all. I certainly take away a lot from the film especially at the end when George is laying there and just like that it came. It kind of sums up how the end of all life is death.

Aspects like that make the film very accessible and easy to connect to. Even the smaller moments like George’s narration explaining how he’s pretending to be something he’s not. People can relate to, can understand themes like that.

Nicholas Hoult: Yeah, Colin also has this perfect tone of voice to show that sadness.

It’s quite crushing but also heartfelt how he sort of gets redemption towards the end before he goes.

Nicholas Hoult: That’s kind of a great thing how he ends with that happiness and love.

One thing that’s great about the relationship between George and Kenny is that it never comes off as creepy or predatory. In the wrong hands it easily could have.

Nicholas Hoult: Yeah, obviously in the wrong hands it could have gone horribly wrong. It could have been seedy and I think the way it’s shot makes it work.

Well not just that, I think you and Firth made it work so well.

Nicholas Hoult: We did have a good relationship and that’s very much due to Colin with finding the right tone.

If you don’t mind I’d love to ask you about The Clash of the Titans remake…

Nicholas Hoult: (laughs) Oh, yeah.

I’m a big fan of the original, but I’m perfectly fine with it being remade since it is pretty outdated.

Nicholas Hoult: Yeah.

So what was your experience working on that?

Nicholas Hoult: It was fantastic. It was my first time working on one of those action adventure films. It was very exciting to me and it was a big learning curve trying to figure out how those things work. To be a small part of it was very entertaining. I’m excited to see it and I was there a good amount of time… so much in those films gets done during post-production and it’s very exciting.

How was it working with Louis Leterrier? I’m a big fan of his work.

Nicholas Hoult: He was fantastic. He’s a top man and has nothing but respect for actors. He’s a very funny and very relaxed man. There’s a lot of special effects there…

I’ve heard Leterrier used a good amount of practical effects too.

Nicholas Hoult: Yeah, there was. There wasn’t a whole lot of green-screen work as well and they built a lot of sets. That’s great for us as actors to have an environment to act around instead of being in front of a green screen having things there you can’t see.

Did you see that teaser they just put out?

Nicholas Hoult: I did, there’s a lot more of the film that wasn’t shown.

It was pretty impressive.

Nicholas Hoult: It was. It had the rock music and everything. When we did it I literally felt like I was back in my garden back home when I was seven years old playing around. It’s insane, getting paid to do that as a job.

It was a little ironic though sine I saw that right after I saw the trailer for A Single Man which was also great, but they’re both very different.

Nicholas Hoult: (laughs) Yeah, they’re both very different things. It was perfect for the film; it didn’t give a lot away.

When I was offered to participate in a roundtable with the (overseas) famous pop star Rain I didn’t really know anything about him. Didn’t know he was a musician or the fact that he has some intense fans. To me, he was just the minor character in Speed Racer and the upcoming star of Ninja Assassin. That changed a little bit when Rain arrived at the screening I attended. It became obvious that he was quite popular due to the plenty of rabid fans that were there, which all came off as quite creepy. With all that said, here’s what Rain had to say about Ninja Assassin, which is now in theaters.

I believe you were at comic-con last year, was that fun?

Rain: Yes, it was fun. It was [a] great experience. I love comic-con.

Since you worked with James on Speed Racer was that were the idea came about of you guys doing this together?

Rain: He’s a great director as you know. When we were working on Speed Racer we had [a] good relationship… When I finished  Speed Racer I said,”I wanna work with you again.” Then dreams came true and we made it. He’s always humble to everyone. He’s [a] good man.

You’ve done a good job transitioning from music to film and has it been helpful being able to work with directors like the Wachowski brothers, James McTeigue, and Park Chan-Wook?

Rain: Yes, right. Thats right…

Have you been learning something new with each director?

Rain: Yes, I learned a lot when I was working with James and Park. They’re the best and I love them.

How was it shooting in Berlin?

Rain: I love Berlin! There’s so many girls (laughs), a lot of food, the people were great, and everything is perfect. I love Berlin.

The Wachowski brothers are producers on this, but how involved were they? Were they on set a lot?

Rain: When we [were] working on Speed Racer Larry and Andy offered me [Ninja Assassin], how could I say no to that? I [was] always with the Wachowski brothers when I was filming.

On Speed Racer you worked mostly with green screens, was this an easier experience?

Rain: Almost eighty-percent was green screen. It was [a] good experience, but Ninja Assassin is better… for me. (chuckles)

I’ve heard the Wachowski brothers have an idea for a sequel, are you signed on for one? Would you want to do one?

Rain: Yes, but I wanna work with the Wachowski [brothers] again. If people like the movie then we will make Ninja two, but I don’t know.

A lot of people think you’re attached to the Enter the Dragon remake, so you’re not signed on?

Rain: No, I haven’t decided yet.

Who would you play though? Bruce Lee’s character?

Rain: Actually… I don’t know, because I cant tell you. Yeah, I haven’t signed [on] yet.

Is there any particular reason why you haven’t signed on?

Rain: Its not green light, its red light.

If it gets green-lit will you sign on?

Rain: Yeah.

Cormac McCarthy’s The Road is one of his best books and is simply pure greatness. Now, his masterwork is making its way to the big screen thanks to director John Hillcoat. Hillcoat’s previous film, The Proposition, was obviously inspired by McCarthy’s work so it made plenty of sense when he signed on. He’s now delivered a very faithful adaptation that any fan will most likely enjoy. The Road is now in theaters.

One theme that I really enjoy in your films is the idea of what extreme environments do to people. What is it about that idea that appeals to you?

John Hillcoat: Just that it puts people under pressure and I’ve always believed that the essence of drama is conflict — when people are under pressure that creates conflict. I also think that a lot of these worlds are extreme and I think a lot of genres that appeal to me are like that with gangster films and also westerns. There are other times and other places and I think those other worlds and places have always appealed to the imagination since they’re full of adventure. Basically, for me, its revealing and a way to reveal what’s under the surface.

One thing about the book is that its very episodic and has a loose narrative which worked great in that medium. Can you talk about the challenges of adapting a book that doesn’t have the most cinematic narrative?

John Hillcoat: Well, that was a challenge and the real challenge. That worried me about the book, but again when you scale it down there’s still key turning points and beneath it is a very strong and simple story. In terms of a father and son where the father is the teacher and then the son becomes the teacher, there is a clear shift and change. The father is actually trying to save the son and the son actually ends up saving the father. So it becomes a complete… There’s a clear journey, there’s clear changes and they come against clear dramatic obstacles. So in that sense even though it’s episodic there’s a narrative structure there because there’s a continual… But I know what you’re saying. It was a real lesson as well that I always knew but not to this degree which is basically that: in a book repetition can be an amazing rhythm in your head bouncing around from endless pages while on film its just magnified a hundred times. It’s a different headspace, if that makes sense. So we actually filmed being slightly conscious of this but in the editing it started as…

Four and a half hours?

John Hillcoat: (laughs) It was boiling it down and even in the book it had that feeling of things coming down to an essence. It’s kind of stripped bare even though it has this grueling, sprawling and repetitious thing. All those beats and changes are within it. It was really with all the boiling down and as soon as things felt repetitious they had to go. To put it in a different way, that’s all it was and it was precisely the episodic repetition that was the bit we had to keep. That was a key, how to get to that final point.

Can you say what was in that extra two and a half hours? Will we ever be able to see that footage?

John Hillcoat: It was the first assembly so that’s such a crude stage for a lot of films. It varies, but the average is three to four hours for every film. That’s also the very first time… and I’m not even involved in the edit. The editor puts together whatever we’re shooting and that’s what that is. So, I would never let that go out since it’s such a crude work in progress. You’re always aware that certain scenes may not be as good as others. On the DVD extras we will include whole scenes and whole chunks that will be on the extras. Some of those [scenes] are deliberately not put on, because I think they’d be misinterpreted. There’s a certain quite graphic scene in the book that I fought like hell to put in…

Was it the fetus scene?

John Hillcoat: (laughs) I fought like hell and I said going into this film, “we can’t shy away from anything,” but I ended up fighting like hell to have it removed, because it was one of those things that came in the part of the story that was totally redundant in terms of boiling it down. At that point it was all about meeting the old man and the boy starting to turn things around. All that did was go back to the beginning of the film so that was…

Back tracking.

John Hillcoat: Yeah, a back track. When you visualize that it was too much while in your head it has sort of a taboo power to it, but in reality it’s more like, “give me a break.” Some of those things took the spotlight off what we’re always trying to show — the journey and the relationship.

I think Nick Cave and Warren Ellis are fantastic composers and did a great job here, could you talk about your collaboration with them?

John Hillcoat: We go back a long way. With Nick, I’ve known him since I was a teenager. He’s scored every single film I’ve worked on and now he’s writing films. I’ve worked on a lot of his music projects, it’s an incredible collaboration. Warren Ellis is one of his great collaborators and likewise I’ve formed one with both Warren and Nick on my past couple of films. We start talking about the score sometimes even before the script is written. In this case, I told them about how the new McCarthy book landed in my lap and we started talking about that. With The Proposition, that’s how he came into writing it. He talked so much about the score of this outback western that we both got fed up with the time it was taking because we went to other writers. So I asked him to try it. It’s a great collaboration, there’s a very organic thing since it starts so early. There’s always all this preparation and discussion, but the thing that’s great about Warren and Nick is that they watch the film fresh. I don’t show them any rushes. They watch it and once it started to form shape that’s what they react off of. It’s kind of an unusual process, its nothing like how most films are traditionally scored.

What were the four lines that McCarthy wanted put back into the film?

John Hillcoat: Its when the boy says, “what would you do if I died?”, and the father says, “I’d want to die too so you can be with me and I can be with you.” Which is just a beautiful thing to say, but it also prefigures what’s to come. Then Cormac made some really helpful notes with the voiceover and he’s just so precise. He just talked about four lines and single words; he didn’t miss the baby or any of that stuff.

It didn’t feel needed.

John Hillcoat: Oh no, in fact he knew it worked much better as this stripped down form. He’s seen it a couple of times and he’s coming to New York to see it again. I keep him up to date and it’s quite a personal and important book to him.

Can you talk about what else is going to be on the Blu-ray? Will you do a commentary?

John Hillcoat: That hasn’t come up yet so I don’t know what’s going to be involved in all that.

Will To Have and Hold and Ghosts of the Civil Dead be released on DVD anytime soon?

John Hillcoat: Ghosts of the Civil Dead will be released in America within two years. It’s been held up for lots of different reasons. It’s kind of strangely more relevant now than it ever was.

I know you’re circling a few projects right now; can you give a few updates?

John Hillcoat: Well, one touchwood that’s most likely to…

The Wettest County?

John Hillcoat: Yeah its West Virginia, moonshine, backwoods and Prohibition. Nick Cave has written the script and we’ve got a phenomenal cast. Hopefully, but — it’s really tough out there.

Who’s attached to that?

John Hillcoat: Um… Ryan Gosling and Shia LaBeouf. But yeah, I shouldn’t really talk about it cause it’s in the middle of all sorts of stuff.

And what about The Death of Bunny Munro?

John Hillcoat: We’re going to turn that into television. We’re going to try and wake up the BBC and — or actually Channel 4. We’re trying to say to British television, “look at HBO, I mean what the hell are you doing?”

And are you involved with the remake of La Bonne Année?

John Hillcoat: No… That’s very misleading, all that stuff.

Up is still in my top three films of the year. Even now with it’s release on Blu-ray, the gut-punch still gets me and it’s still a marvelous film to watch. The Blu-ray is also no slouch in it’s pristine presentation of the film, it also features a nice batch of extras that go into great detail about how and why the film was made. In honor of this release, I was able to participate in a virtual roundtable discussion with both Docter and Peterson. Aside from being dressed in obscure outfits (Docter in a bunny suit, Peterson as Amelia Earhart,) both seemed to be very proud of the work they did. They should be as the film is incredible.

Who came up with the idea to cast Ed Asner as Carl?

Bob Peterson: Once Pete and I had arrived at the idea of doing an Old Man movie, the thought of Ed Asner came fairly early on. Good casting at Pixar is an exercise of balance. Woody in “Toy Story” could have been perceived as unappealing when he was jealous of Buzz if we had the wrong voice for him, but Tom Hanks brings such a natural appeal that he balanced any of Woody’s negatives. The same with Ed Asner. Ed’s soulfullness balanced his curmudgeon side. When Ed saw the small statue of his character when he came in to read for us he said “It looks nothing like me!!!” In a cranky (tongue in cheek) way. We knew from that, that Ed was the perfect voice for Carl!!

Other than the trip to South America, what inspired the story of UP?

Bob Peterson: Various things – the lives of our grandparents. For example, I had a grandfather who always wanted to go West from Ohio, but never got the chance. I had the foresight to videotape my grandparent’s home after they had passed 20 years ago. There are the side by side chairs – one soft and one hard which absolutely paralleled who the were as people. Many of our life experiences with our wives and children were put into play in the script, and of course living with our dogs gave us great insight into dog behavior!

Who or what was the inspiration behind Charles Muntz?

Bob Peterson: Charles Muntz in story terms is “Carl Fredriksen at the end of the line.” In other words, if Carl had made it to Paradise Falls without accepting others into his life, then he would have gone crazy, wallowing in his unfinished quest. Carl is represented by a square shape. So as far as shape language, Muntz is a “collapsed square.” He end up having more diamond shapes as if a square has collapsed upon itself. From real reference, we looked at the grand adventurers of the last century including Lindbergh. We looked at Howard Hughes, being a sort of inventor/adventurer. We also looked at photos of Errol Flynn and even the dapper photos of Walt Disney in the 1930′s with his pencil thin mustache.

While Docter was on hand as well, he didn’t answer the questions we gave him. Nor did he answer the question my partner in crime Shane MacDonald of Eye Crave Network, but Bob Peterson was. Shane was gracious enough to let me use his question for this piece, so if you could, give him and his site a visit. I promise he won’t steal your girlfriend.

When you release the final film is it like watching your kids go off into the world? You’ve shaped it, guided along, then you have to let them go and see how they do.

Bob Peterson: Yes. It is interesting watching the movie for the first time at our Wrap Parties with our crew. We don’t ever get to see our movies like a regular audience member because we lived through the creation of the film and see the memories brought forward by each shot and movement we see. When I look at my 14 year old (who I don’t want to grow up and go to college!!!) I see her as a 3 year old at the pumpkin patch, the the 5th grader at the spelling bee.Those memories are there. When our movies leave us we hope we’ve given them enough love and sense to do great things in the world!!

Up is available now on Blu-ray and DVD, but quite honestly, grab the Blu-ray. Better deal, and it comes with a DVD of the film that has some nice extras.

If you’ve seen An Education then you already know how excellent it is. The film premiered at Sundance this year and was met with wonderful reviews. It’s a coming of age tale about a girl trying to figure out what to do with her life and of course her education. While that may sound like a movie you’ve already seen before, it isn’t. It fully deserves it’s acclaim and it also features one of the year’s best performances from Carrey Mulligan. The film is currently in limited theaters and will be expanding this weekend. With all that said, here’s what the film’s director Lone Scherfig had to say.

Warning: This interview contains heavy spoilers.

How’s this day been for you? Do you like doing all these interviews?

Lone Scherfig: Yes, because I haven’t done much of it yet. Its fine… It would be weird not to since you do all this work to get some feedback and hear about the questions that this film poses.

What was your experience like at Sundance this year?

Lone Scherfig: It was fantastic! The reaction was positive and it was the first public screening of the film. It was great sitting in a room hearing people laugh where we hoped they would. Its also a wonderful place.

Could you talk about how, exactly, you got involved?

Lone Scherfig: Nick Hornby and I have the same agent so she slipped me the script early on and I said I wouldn’t mind if they asked me to do it and they did.

Since it is Nick Hornby, I imagine that the original script he wrote was great. So did you not have to make a lot of changes to it?

Lone Scherfig: He did about two drafts when I was onboard and sometimes you change things for practical reasons. Its a very English thing to do — to keep working and working. So he re-wrote a little bit, but not much.

One thing about his books is that all his characters seem to have a distinct awareness of problems in society, even the little things. Would you say that applies to this film?

Lone Scherfig: Well, its a film that discusses education from different angles. Why should she have one, and each of the characters are actually defined by whether they have an education or not. The father’s insecurity, thats the way David came into the family so easily because the father didn’t have an education. The way Jenny and her mom don’t really understand each other since Jenny is ahead of her own mother educationally. Nick Hornby is a former school teacher… Its kind of like a little glass ball you look into where you see London exploding straight after the film. All of England and the world changed culturally very rapidly. So, it is Jenny’s preparation for a future that she’s not sure of. She has this appetite for life, for art and she just wants to do something and not become Emma Thompson’s character. She doesn’t know what is and I think this is Nick’s thesis on how education affects people. It also looks at how London was coming of age, just like Jenny.

That’s actually what I just about to bring up: that this really is a coming of age tale. I didn’t find Jenny particularly likable at the beginning. She seemed resentful towards her parents and was even mean to that boy who liked her. Would you classify this as a coming of age tale since she changes so much?

Lone Scherfig: Its hard to put it into a specific genre. This is actually a marketing problem we have since the film is at times comedic and at other times it is a thoughtful drama. That’s one good reason of why talking to someone like you is important since you get to give people more keys to the story… The story comes first and sometimes you can get humor out of the material and sometimes you avoid jokes since you don’t get much out of them.

I think this also fits into the category of films like Revolutionary Road and Far From Heaven — which show society’s problems in a new light. What would you say this film does differently for that genre?

Lone Scherfig: Well, I love those two films and I also love melodrama. I don’t have the courage to do that though. I prefer something more humorous and optimistic. This is not about a girl who’s self-destructing, but someone who has to fight to go to school for her own reasons and not anyone else’s reasons. She has to figure out why she wants an education while her father wants her to have one just for security.

One scene that stuck out, to me was where Jenny first came home from hanging out with David and her mother seemed jealous when she said she had had the best night of her life. Was that intended or am I looking at that differently?

Lone Scherfig: I think she just doesn’t understand her daughter and she commits a sin of omission by not asking her about her night. Jenny wants to open up and talk, but her mother doesn’t feel like she has the right to talk to someone more educated. The mother should have been there for her and she wasn’t. Her daughter is just a different species. She doesn’t understand her.

Could you talk about casting Carrey Mulligan? She was great.

Lone Scherfig: Yeah, we had a pile up of auditions and she just really stood out. She was always the one I wanted, but we had a really long casting process to make sure every decision was the right one. She hadn’t done anything and some of the others were more experienced. It was her first main role and she’s someone you like to look at on screen. She’s really good.

I heard Peter say in an interview that you would allow him to basically stop while shooting during a scene and talk to an extra to make a scene feel more natural. Is that true?

Lone Scherfig: I do believe a lot in getting ideas on the spot about your physical surroundings. If Peter had an idea like that I would trust him. It feels more organic and less staged.

There seemed to be this odd parallel between David and Jenny. They both pretended to be something they’re not. Was that at all your intent?

Lone Scherfig: That’s a good point… A part of her love for him is that she sees him as the person she wants to be like. She also is a fake at times, like at the beginning where she hides that she goes to school and pretends to be older. After two weeks she seems older, because she becomes more settled in that lifestyle. They are not honest with each other at that point and she even admits that she would be bored without him. Even at the point where she says that she knows he is a criminal. She still forgives him since life without him is much worse than with him.

Do you think David felt a connection to her since they’re kind of alike in that aspect?

Lone Scherfig: No, I think it is that she’s honest and blunt. She’s so sweet and charming. That’s what he falls for.

Do you think he truly cared for her or was looking to exploit her?

Lone Scherfig: He falls for her and he finds her innocence very heartbreaking and warming. He doesn’t want to exploit her and he’s even relieved when she doesn’t want to make love early on. She’s even more advanced than he is because of his boyish antics. He’s not the greatest lover in British film history (laughs).

There’s obviously an ambiguity whether David will continue that life at the end. The last scene you see him in, he seems destroyed and maybe as if he’s realized how bad his actions have been.

Lone Scherfig: We talked about that, how he’s done it before, and with someone as young as Jenny. When he says he’ll get a divorce I think he means it, but he’s also the type of person who says to his wife the next day, “let’s have another child.” He’s a borderline sociopath.

Would you say you feel any sympathy for him? I don’t know if this makes me a bad person, but I felt somewhat bad for him in that last scene.

Lone Scherfig: I have tons of sympathy for him and I like him. He is a bad person, but he’s very human. Both Peter Sarsgaard and I totally love him, but he is not a good guy (laughs). I just hope my daughters never run into someone like him one day (laughs).

A lot of scenes earlier on that focused on David seemed brightly lit and the camera felt distant, was this intentional to make him come off as more glamorous?

Lone Scherfig: Yes, we were trying to make him look glamorous. Scenes like the auction are lit slickly to make him seem glamorous. Other scenes where Jenny is in trouble are rougher and more handled. We invested a lot of energy in lighting and it all depends on location.

That’s one thing I loved about the film is that the cinematography actually adds layers to the story and characters. Was that always planned?

Lone Scherfig: Yeah, we wrote that stuff into the script. It is a little eerie and those scenes seem darker. The gas station scene is a perfect example. Instead of making it look big, we wanted this small melodramatic feeling where the gas station seems downright cute. I think it worked for the film and when you read these locations on page they come off like something from an American film. Its the American mythology of having people at gas stations discovering something horrible.

How much do you storyboard?

Lone Scherfig: That scene actually was storyboarded, because we had very little time there to shoot. For a film like this, not much. If it is a scene that we know will be technically complicated then I’ll storyboard it. All the rain sequences we story boarded too…

Did you do that for the Paris sequence?

Lone Scherfig: Yeah, because that’s period Paris so that was really hard. We still shot it handheld and there are just some places you can’t shoot in Paris.

You may not have heard of The 4th Reich yet, but soon you’ll be hearing much more along with news of the film’s director, Shaun Robert Smith.

The film, which begins production in April, is the first feature film from Smith, whose short film The Soldier displayed an excellent knack of cinematography and suspense.

It also won a small boatload of awards and gained a national theatrical release in the UK.

You can watch The Soldier here.

The short film forms a sort of foundation for The 4th Reich.

From the official synopsis for the film:

June 1944, after the glorious victory on D-day, the armies of the combined allied forces begin their long push to Berlin with the aim of bringing down Hitler and the despised Nazi regime of the Third Reich.

But buried deep in secret files German Reichstag, is the chilling reality of Hitler’s plan to create an eternal living hell, The 4th Reich.

A small brigade of soldiers from 3rd Infantry Division, under the command of the battle hardened Captain Bathurst embark on an ever darkening quest to liberate Europe. Fighting their way through the French countryside, villages and war ravaged towns. Each step discovering progressively strange battles and events until they reach an abandoned research facility where the true horror begins…

What’s interesting (and distinctive from other films of this ilk such as Dead Snow) is that the filmmaker plans to realistically ground the film in historical fact.

“The audience today are extremely savvy and the plot may be accepted as an event in history or simply appeal to their imagination, which allows for the characters, setting, and plot events as if they actually could have happened.”

What’s even more interesting is the fact that the film will be in 3D, with a cast headed up by genre actors such as Tom Savini (Dawn of the Dead, Knightriders) and Craig Conway (Doomsday, The Descent). For a first outing, the crew Smith has assembled is pretty outstanding: Director of Photography Peter Hannan worked on Children of Men, while the FX team has been credited on The Wolfman, Rambo, and Valkyrie.

I had the chance to chat with Mr. Smith for a brief interview, and he was gracious enough to fill me in on more details.

John: Can you tell me a little about your favorite films and filmmakers? My materials mention John Carpenter’s The Fog, which I love along with the rest of his canon.

Shaun: Where to begin, many films have been influential to me since I was young. One of my earliest memories was watching The Gate with Stephen Dorff. I knew somebody had to be creating these images, so I was hooked. The Fog was another, but I landed my parents in it when I decided as an 8 year old to write about watching it at school! But these films had an impact on me, when I finally started making films professionally I was heavily influenced by Fulci, Scorsese, Romero and Argento.

These guys really helped me indentify my own directing style, a style which I hope our audience will indentify with. It’s difficult for me to select a favorite film, I guess we could argue, which genre etc, but I usually say the film that most had an effect on me in my youth was Raiders of the Lost Ark amongst all the horror.

John: Your short film The Soldier preceded a rush of films and media such as Dead Snow, Outpost and even Call of Duty: World at War in the Nazi/Zombie genre. It even preceded Inglourious Basterds in terms of being a stylized take on World War II era material. Talk a bit about making The 4th Reich distinct in an area that’s suddenly becoming somewhat crowded.

Shaun: Where do I begin? Lots of these sub-genre films follow the same structure, I was totally aware of this whilst writing the script, fair enough, it fits into the sub-genre but boy is it original. We have something for everyone in this film. I wanted to create a period piece, but include as much accurate historical information as I could, we are dealing with World War II here, the story needs to be told. World War II was a tragic event in history, I don’t want to poke fun at it, but more exploit the darker side of what the Nazi’s were involved with, distancing ourselves from purely exploitative films like Dead Snow, Outpost etc.

We started this journey way back in 1998, with my student film horror called AWOL to Horror that was actually about a conspiracy theory during the Vietnam conflict! The story evolved over the next few years, the setting changed to war torn Europe as I discovered Hitler actually commissioned research into re-animation of dead tissue! So the story of The 4th Reich was conceived, but I needed to test the water with the idea, so we produced The Soldier and entered it in a few festivals resulting in a few awards, a theatrical release and a distribution deal.

John: How did you transition from the short film to The 4th Reich? Specifically, how does a filmmaker land Tom Savini, a well-rounded cast and what’s shaping up to be an amazingly talented crew for a feature length zombie picture?

Shaun: I met Tom when I was 18 at a convention way back in 1998, I showed him the script of AWOL to Horror, Tom flicked through and signed it! I jokingly asked him if he wanted to be in it, he jokingly replied “I’d love to.” 10 years down the line and now in a serious position, Tom IS in it. Lucky for us Tom loved the script, his character is something he’s never done before and he can’t wait to get started. Our FX team has been hand-picked, as you know that’s how I started out in this business so I needed a crack team of FX artists, these guys are the cream of British FX artists and I feel very comfortable with them carrying out the FX.

I have assigned specialist to each role, we have guts, explosives, prosthetics and limbs specialists! As I’m about to pop my feature filmmaking cherry, we have surrounded myself with talented filmmakers, a team that produces films the traditional way, Peter Hannan, our DoP has worked with Kubrick and has seen his fair share of action, casting legend Jeremy Zimmerman is putting together a brilliant cast, so far including Sean Pertwee, Craig Conway, the afore mentioned Tom Savini, with much more to come. We will see a few other Horror legends grace the screen and Clayton Fussell from The Soldier return.

John: The 4th Reich will be in 3D. What’s your opinion on the state of 3D film? Is it a fad that’s recently had a successful resurgence, or will it be here to stay?

Shaun: I believe the direction of recent releases means that 3D is here to stay, with the introduction of 3D TV etc. 3D has been back and forth for years, we have seen almost every animated film over the past months get released in 3D, and the techniques are becoming more available to filmmakers, even amateur filmmakers are producing 3D films. With The 4th Reich, we have been very innovative in our approach, over the past few weeks we have been watching plenty of 3D films selecting what works and what doesn’t work, and believe me it’s a fine line. So much can go wrong with 3D, but when you get right it throws the audience into a whole new world.

John: You’re a credited screenwriter on the picture as well as sitting in the director’s chair. In writing, how does one stay true to the genre needs of a zombie film while retaining an interesting and unique voice, as was evident in The Soldier?

Shaun: I’m a huge fan of this sub-genre, my DVD collection has its own shelf, just for this sub-genre. I have been producing these types of films for years. AWOL to Horror, The Twitching Dead and The Forgotten Ground are just a few, they just haven’t seen the light of day. But all have contributed to The 4th Reich. When I started writing the script I took all the rules and threw them out of the window, thinking outside the box was priority, I wrote the film as a war film, but let the situation pull the characters down a darker path keeping true to the events of WWII, but slightly exaggerating the darker points.

This project is very ambitious for a first timer, but that doesn’t bother me, this idea has been festering in my mind for long enough, I know every shot, every angle and the script like the back of my hand.

John: You’re proud of heralding a more realistic, true-to-actual-events tone and story in the concept of The 4th Reich. Where did your interest in exploring the subject derive from, where do your thematic interests dwell?

Shaun: After we produced The Soldier we uploaded it to YouTube, which was very successful, we endured tens of thousands of hits in just 2 weeks. But I had a comment from somebody about the soldier wearing the wrong gear for that period, it shouldn’t have bothered me, but it did. Our vision and intention for The 4th Reich is primarily to be a war film, although there just happens to be a premise, which encapsulates the characters, leaving them with plenty to deal with. Similar to that of Saving Private Ryan, in their quest to save Private Ryan, they had encountered something not seen before, something dark and at that moment, the focus of their mission became survival, a test of human endurance and unspeakable horror.

Whilst researching the script, I discovered much information about Adolf Hitler’s true intentions. Hitler’s firm belief, in the coming of a new race, the ‘Supermen’, A Fourth Reich ultimately led to his expectations that a literal ‘mutation’ of Homo sapiens, could be achieved by arriving at higher levels of consciousness. This vision alone leaves us plenty of room to engage an audience, having them at the edge of their seats. With this genre of motion picture, it is simply not plausible to produce a horror genre piece, within the setting of WWII. My aim is to deliver a period piece, from wardrobe to location.

John: The Soldier was violent and bloody, to be sure, but not excessive. In terms of tone, it was more akin to the documentary-style feel of the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, mixed with say, Wolfenstein. Should we expect a bloodbath with The 4th Reich?

Shaun: Yes! I’m glad you mentioned TCM, it too is one of my favorite horror films, its clever in a way that you don’t see any blood, but you come away thinking that you have just witnessed something horrific! The 4th Reich will leave you feeling that way, but you won’t be thinking, you’ll know that you have just seen something horrific. The attitude I want to take is let’s cram it full of gore, but at least we have the option to cut it out if the higher powers say we should, thanks to Ridley, we have the director’s cut!

In most cases, Zombies are viewed with a pinch of humor, I will create the world’s first truly terrifying Zombie movie, although I don’t like using the ‘Z’ word. A few of our FX guys did Rambo 4, now that film is beyond brutal, we aim to bring the same brutality to The 4th Reich. Watch this space.

Oh, we’ll be watching, Mr. Smith, and keeping you Atomic Popcorn readers updated as the film progresses. Till then!