Indie Horror Director David White Interview

David White: Titillating Disney with Broken Hearts’ Young Genius. By Brian Kirst

David White is one of the most talented, up and coming directors on the indie horror scene. He is creative,brutally honest and forthright. Currently working on a horror filled adaptation of an R.L. Stine book and prepping the way for a sequel to his thought provoking Pierre in Peril, White recently took some time out to answer some hard boiled questions for Horror Society.

www.davidwhitefan.com

Brian: Who were your first artistic influences – David Cronenberg making Debbie Harry do nasty things in the 80’s –Bianca Jagger’s coke streaked nose – A dandruff ridden philosopher aunt?

David: Walt Disney to be honest!  But more the films that were new when I was little like The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast.  The latter is the first film I remember seeing in theaters.  I didn’t know what any of the fundamentals of making a film were until I was 11, but until then I always knew it was what I wanted to do, because of those films, initially.

Horror-wise, there was a special on TV every Saturday at midnight in Las Vegas (where I was born) called Count Kool Rider, and this guy dressed up like a vampire would introduce films like the Amityville sequel about the lamp, Lucio Fulci’s The Beyond, The Alchemist by Charles Band… and whatever their merits may be to me now, they all really scared me when I was little, and horror quickly became the most indelible genre for me.  No other sort of film made me feel things so extreme.

Brian: I agree! – What would you like your films to do the most – entertain, titillate, educate?

David: The first two.

Brian: Cool. You are currently working on a project called Broken Hearts. Can you tell us a little about that?

David: Sorry for this long answer.  It’s an unauthorized adaptation of an R.L. Stine Fear Street book of the same name, about teenage girls who are stalked in the days leading up to Valentine’s Day.  R.L. Stine knows that I’m making it and really dislikes the fact.  He’s very rude when you ask him important questions (as regards the book’s rights which are “taken and in use”… yeah, sure, R.L.!).  Which is a shame, because I was a big Goosebumps fan when I was little.  He’s not a very good author, but granted I haven’t read any of his “adult’ novels, and I respect what he did for my adolescence.  He was kind of the Dan Brown of his time, wasn’t he?

I’m adapting the book into a film though, to show that I’m a director first and everything else second.  I’m not really an actor, but up till this point, my films are more associated with how I’m presented on screen than with what I do as a director.  I latched onto Broken Hearts because I hadn’t made a feature in almost three years, and wanted to make one immediately and not have to wait for a script.  I was really impatient and it was just kind of essential for my well-being, artistically to make a film I didn’t star in at all, and had a sizable cast of people that weren’t me.  So I had this very simplistic book that registered with me as possible to adapt right away.

The only films I’ve consciously thought of while making Broken Hearts have been Russ Meyer’s Beyond the Valley of the Dolls and David Lynch’s Inland Empire.  The latter has been the most inspirational—I know a lot of people don’t agree, but I thought it was a mini-DV-shot film that really deeply worked.  The photography is amazing, and you’re really not on its wavelength if you manage to nit-pick about certain shots going in and out of focus.  That film’s proved to me that a mini-DV feature can be just as exciting as any “pure” 35mm film.  Beyond the Valley of the Dolls is hilarious, and my goal is to edit Broken Hearts in a similar way.  Russ Meyer wasn’t really working with great actors and it shows in the editing, which cracks me up.  And something about that movie’s great big boner for girls clicks in my head and lets me see what arouses one heterosexual guy about women translates for me to my attraction to guys—we’re really all the same, sexually and that’s a no-brainer, but overall, that film’s helped me understand how to photograph girls appealingly (though the guys in my film are never less sexualized than the girls). And also, after making two predominately black and white features, I really wanted to make something very colorful.  What “horror” there is in Broken Hearts doesn’t come from desaturated color or really exclusively any trappings of the plot—it’s more Larry Clark or Catherine Breillat than Wes Craven’s Scream.  It’s about sex.  And hormones. R.L.’s book is a sham—wasn’t he a teenager once?  Those characters weren’t just kissing on the mouth on Valentine’s Day.

Also, doing editing work on other directors’ horror films in 2008 and seeing how much money they spent and hearing about all their difficulties with that, inspired me to make an ambitious no-budget horror film that got by solely on its acting and style, and not on what money could buy.  So many peers of mine seem to be trying to prove that they’re capable of making a product, which is understandable but not interesting or admirable to me.  I believe in getting what you can for free, stealing locations and working with the bare minimum.  Lloyd Kaufman reassured for me that you can’t have any shame as an independent filmmaker.  You should try to make the film you want, and if to you that means spending a certain amount of money, that’s fine.  But be noble about it.  If you’re throwing money at a film just to show that you can, I think you should reevaluate yourself.

Brian: True – Now, for the really important question, though – what is worse than a broken heart – a broken Ashley Judd doll- a broken nose?

David: A dick getting cut off with a pizza-slicer.

Brian: Now that’s a bloody variation on pepperoni if I’ve ever heard of one! – If you could share the one film of yours with the world that best represents your essence, what would it be?

David: My short, Evil Night Together best represents my essence.  I’m convinced that the most perfect film, when I see it, will be a film noir.  I think it’s the only genre aside from horror that can best combine other genres.  A film noir can be anything.  It’s not my favorite film of mine, but it’s the one that most efficiently suggests the sort of films I want to continue making.  I’m not a fan of style over substance, but I believe they should always be equal.  I don’t think a viewer has to “forget” they’re watching a film for it to be a pure film—I think it’s exciting to realize you’re being entertained while you watch something, and to enjoy it as spectacle. I also love its anachronisms that aren’t really anachronisms.  I rarely if ever underline a specific era in any of my stuff—I like to pick and choose from every era.  You might think Evil Night Together’s a period film but every few seconds there’s something contrary to that.  You won’t be able to pigeonhole the years that Broken Hearts takes place over, either.  I want the stuff I direct to be as timeless as it can be.  The zooms in Barry Lyndon contributed to my feeling this way.

Brian: Cool. So – What would an ‘evil night together’ constitute for you?

David: Jill Tracy’s song sums it up, but mine personally, would consummate the seduction that the film version teases with for 5 minutes.  I’m not old-fashioned.  The poison, prostitutes, rope and train tracks would figure in.

Brian: But, don’t they always?! – What was your initial impetus for the amazing Pierre in Peril and how do you hope it’s received by the public?

David: I was commissioned to make Pierre in Peril, and did it as a favor to the director of a film I helped edit (that you’ve reviewed on your site)—since that had been my first paying film job, and I was grateful.  I knew thesort of film he wanted and tried to make it.  I knew from the start that in essence, I was basically making pornography, and the first step was not lying about it.  I took it on as something different for me.  The idea was to put the “porn” into “torture-porn”, not only by sexualizing the violence, but not forgetting to sexualize the sex as much as I could.  And making the film alone, my only options sort of fell down to either autofellatio, conventional masturbation or fingering myself.  I opted for the second, since it was easiest and I was making the film quickly.

I firmly believe that the film is not amazing though!  It was an experiment and it’s not entirely successful.  I’m not so sure that art film and exploitation combine well, yet.  For what the film’s aiming to do, it’s pretentious and long-winded, even at 19 minutes, but there are moments I like.  I think it’s a film you watch only once.  It’s not good porn. But I hope it leaves people feeling a little violated and weirded out.  Michael Haneke’s Funny Games was a subconscious inspiration I think—I realized when I edited it that the violence should be more senseless.  And it’s a short!  The killer doesn’t need inspiration.  The 28-minute version pretty firmly lays out a motive, and that was a mistake.

Brian: Well, I must say I truly enjoyed the version I saw! – Do you have a personal favorite, thus far, among your projects? (Or are they all your children and you can’t send just one to the front of the line?)

David: My second feature, Doe is my favorite.  It’s me at my most open, and I think accessible, even though it initially seems to not be accessible at all.  The idea was to combine the style of what would seem to be an impenetrable art film gimmick (in this case, the whole film done in stills), with a completely straightforward and simply told melodrama.  If you give yourself over to it, you realize how easy it is to watch.  In that sense, it’s kind of an “Art Film for Dummies”, or a good transitional film for a viewer who’s usually more into conventional, mainstream stuff.  If you can make it about 30 minutes in, I think you’re set. Emotionally though, I think it’s the most effective of my stuff, and the most universal in its themes.  It’snothing but honest, which isn’t something I can say about my other work.  Filmmaking should be about lying (and Ihave no real interest right now in making a documentary), but Doe is very real to me.  I don’t know when I’ll make another film as unafraid of honesty.

Brian:Awesome! – Lastly, any words of advice (IE: Don’t invite a dangerous doppelganger with a knife into your bedroom at night) or future projects that you’d like to tell us about? And thanks – this has been better than a wigand lipstick treatment any time of the month!

David: Well there’s the conventional “don’t wait for all the stars to align financially before making your film”.  I think that one’s common sense.  Lloyd Kaufman’s books have been a huge asset in regards to Broken Hearts—there’s only so much you can manage to have control over on a film with no budget and non-actors who have lives.  I’ve really been working from square one on this, so that’s the best advice I can give.  And I believe in watching lots and lots of other people’s films, but I also believe in watching your own, and often.  Overall, I don’t think it’s essential to understand how others perceive your work—you should listen with one ear open.  I think you should watch your own films as objectively as you’re capable of and deal with how you feel about them. Also – I am making a sequel to Pierre in Peril called Pierre in Peril, Again.  haha.  I was commissioned again, but am doing this one more on my own terms.  I mean, there’ll still be blood, pee and cum, but this one’s more of an overt comedy/satire.

Brian: Blood, pee and cum – just a few of our favorite things – can’t wait!!