The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 57, No. 18, Ed. 1 Thursday, February 12, 1970 Page: 2 of 4
four pages : ill. ; page 21 x 14 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
book review
Interviewing the directors: superstars for a tuned-in generation
THE FILM DIRECTOR
AS SUPERSTAR
By Joseph Gelmis
Doubleday: Paperback, $3.50, hardcover $6.95
In the rapidly changing world of films
it is becoming apparent that there are
as many ways to make films as there
are filmmakers, and that the "Holly-
wood system" is precariously outdated.
Joseph Gelmis, a third-four year old
film critic for Newsday, interviewed six-
teen directors who share a commitment
to being responsible for the shape of
the entire film, not just an agent on
the set getting actors and cameramen
to do what a producer or a writer or a
film distribution syndicate wants them
to do.
The interviews reflect a balance be-
tween two forces. The unifying aspects
of Gelmis' choices of questions, editing,
and commentary work toward an ex-
planation of why the new breed of di-
rectors can erode the Hollywood estab-
lishment. The diversifying aspects of
the contradictory opinions offered by
the directors themselves eventually over-
power any belief that there is one best
way to make films. Another less ex-
plicit consideration of the book is related
to the fact that the interviews took place
in 19(59 when Norman Mailer was still
editing Maidstone, Francis Ford Cop-
pola's The Rain People was not yet re-
leased, Arthur Penn was still shooting
Alice's Restaurant, and Mike Nichols
was about to leave for Mexico to film
Catch-22. This time lag .must be taken
into account in evaluating the opinions
of men whose philosophy, skill, and
control over their films change with
experience.
Filmmaking School
Some of the directors were disparaging
when asked about film schools. Jim Mc-
Bride (David Holtzman's Diary, My
Girlfriend's Wedding) bitterly elaborat-
ed on the uselessness of his NYU film
school education where he took
livacmatic courses and bullshit courses. The bull-
shit courses . . . were totally useless and were
taught by people who couldn't make it as film-
makers and had become teachers instead. But
they did have one practical course, a production
course . . . The process of how people were
chosen to be director, editor, and so on was,
in ihe worst sense, political. It depended on who
the teacher liked. Most of the films were pretty
lousy.
Coppola characterized many of the kids
at USC and UCLA film schools as 'in-
credible Godard addicts." Richard Lester
(Help!, Petulia, The Bed Sitting Room)
explained that he was against film
schools because
most of the film schools are geared to producing
not technicians—who probably couldn't get jobs
anyway, because of union restrictions—but to
producing directors. I think the only way to
learn how to direct is to actually direct. And X
think that for the time one spends in a film
school you get precious little chance to actually
direct.
Like Lester, Jim McBride felt the real
education to be unconnected with an
institution: "You just have to go to the
movies as much as you can. Then you
get yourself an 8-mm camera and you
make movies."
The two directors who defend film
schools were, significantly, alumni of the
socialist film schools. Milos Forman
(Black Peter, Loves of a Blond, Fire-
man's Ball) studied at the Prague film
school, where they saw two or three
feature films a week, some from the
Czechoslovakian archives, some (from
international distributers) shown when
sent as promotional copies to Czech film
officials. He thought of the school as
a place to make your mistakes and to fail. You
don't want to take the chances later you can
tke in the privacy of a school, ... to try all your
crazy things, foolish things, stupid things, when
you are young.
Roman Polanski (Repulsion, Cul de Sac,
Rosemary's Baby) studied at the Polish
Film School at Lodz, which taught photo-
graphy, developing, and enlarging the
first two years; included making 35-
mm films with "very professional equip-
ment" the last three years; and offered
film screenings almost continuously from
eight in the morning until eight at night.
Polanski believed the experience of see-
ing and arguing about films with his
friends made him more independent of
commercial rigidity, but he admits other
ways to learn filmmaking. If he were
starting out again, h£ would do "Any-
thing at all, just so I didn't sit around
tand talk about it."
Gelmis probed each director's ideas on
technique, and the extent of the influ-
ence of money on their choice of method.
Some, like Kubrick, Penn, and Nichols,
work with Hollywood budgets in the mil-
lions, but have used Hollywood produc-
tion expertise to implement fresh ideas.
Others 'like Roger Cormon, Coppola,
Lester, and Polanski alternate between
high and low budget films, depending
on the subject and the amount of "mus-
cle" they can exert in a Hollywood that
support filmmakers with established
track records.
There are people like Norman Mailer,
Andy Warhol, and John Cassavetes who
make money by writing novels, selling
soup cans, or acting and then finance
their own movies starring their friends.
The young breed of expex-imentalists like
McBride, Brian De Palma, and Robert
Downey have to peddle their ideas door
to door, get enough money to shoot a
film, renege on equipment and processing
bills, and then face the fight of getting
the film shown in an inflexible distribu-
tion system. No matter how they finance
their ventures or how large their budgets,
these directors are gaining recognition
primarily because they can bring in the
young audiences when Hollywood bombs
out.
Kubrick explains that his early suc-
cesses with Lolita and Dr. Strangelove
caused Hollywood to see things his way,
and give him the backing for his "$10,-
500,000 underground film" — 2001. He
spent most of it on special effects
whipped up in the Hollywood film labs.
He will probably spend as much on a
grandiose Napoleon with 50,000 extras,
a rather risky venture except to an es-
tablishment that is forced to look for
new success formulas.
Coppola was wondering if he had real-
ly sold out to the establishment after
he took on Finian's Rainbow, a film that
has a better chance of repaying its $3.5
million budget than $10 million shots
like Star! and Funny Girl, so he got
$750,000 from his studio, packed a lot of
equipment in a remodeled Dodge bus,
and traveled across America in three
months shooting The Rain People. Cop-
pola's fear—that "The Rain People could
be an awful picture. It's very experi-
mental. Jt doesn't .protect itself at all.
It's not even sensational. No sex. Very
sincere."—now seems ungrounded.
Andy Warhol showed a different type
of response entirely, and the shortness
of his interview may be attributable to
Gelmis getting tired of doing all the
talking and listening to three word re-
plies (or just "Yeah"). He said he hadn't
made a movie yet because, "I think mov-
ies are the kind of things Hollywood
does. We haven't been able to do that;
Because you need a lot of money to do
that. So we're working it out our way."
Warhol films range from one minute
commercials to eight hour films like
Sleep that force the viewers to "create
their own entertainment." The Warhol
portion of Gelmis' book seeme^o confirm
that Warhol hasn't given an interview
yet.
Director Brian De Palma and his pro-
ducer Charles Hirsch filmed Greetings
with $15,000 cash, deferring payment on
the remainder of a $43,0000 budget.
Hirsch hit his parents for a couple of
thousand, sold his stocks and camera,
and got two businessmen to invest an-
other $7,000 for a share in the profits.
Hirsch said, "So what happens is that
once you're in debt past a certain point
it all becomes unreal and you don't wor-
ry about it any more."
Robert Downey made Chafed Elbows
for $25,000, spending his earnings from
waiting tables and finding backers with
his newspaper ads. He got the $200,000
for Putney Swope from "an American
industrialist tycoon, loaded, with silk
factories, rubber factories, and so on,
Only he doesn't want his name used."
Downey then managed to arrange a the-
ater opening, something McBride had
trouble getting for Diary.
The special breed of directors Gelmis
looks at seem to feel a need to make
their own pictures, their own way, any
way that works, and they worry about
the commercial distribution and/or suc-
cess later. They worry about selling a
film to help get money or "muscle" so
they can make another one. Bernardo
Bertolocci points out that his first two
films, The Grim Reaper and Before the
Revolutioiu did not return their invest-
ments, sd®wfr four years he could not
get backing for any of his screen plays
until he adapted a Dostoievsky book for
Partner. He told Gelmis, "If it doesn't
make money, I don't know how long I
will have to wait this time."
HOWARD SIMMS
Drouilhet claims Senate ignores student constituencies
To the Editor:
The Student Senate has ap-
parently come to regard itself
as an autonomous body inde-
pendent of the students it sup-
posedly represents. In recent
weeks it has taken action on
many proposals without bother-
ing to check student body opin-
ion on these matters. A number
of proposals have been acted on
before Rice students have been
adequately notified, if at all,
about them. One Senate member
tried to justify this indifference
to his constituents by saying,
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<4<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<*
I Harold's Garage f
± !
± VV Wrecker Service ^
± |
i 2431 Dunstan JA 8-53235
± ^
"We can't run to the student
body with every little issue";
yet he has failed to survey his
college's opinions on major is-
sues, voting as soon as the issue
is brought up rather than sug-
gesting tabling the motion until
the Senate can ascertain whe-
ther they are acting in the in-
terest of the students or in their
own interest. The same senate
member, when queried as to
whether he feels he should be
affected by college opinion said,
"I don't give a shit."
This wefek, tha, senate voted
that Rice would join the I^SA,
without considering what the
affected students thought.
Someone asked whether students
should be consulted since Rice
had recently voted not to join
that organization. He received
the reply that the reason that
Rice had so voted previously
was that the YAF 'had waged a
campaign against NSA, that the
organization was no longer po-
litical, that the CIA links had
been broken, and, that since all
arguments against joining "are
passe" there was no need to
consult the students again.
When appropriations were be-
ing made to give funds to stu-
dents wishing to attend national
student conferences, several rea-
sonable ones were made to send
representatives to yearbook con-„
ferences, conferences about off-
campus living, etc. However, a
request made by Bill Katzenburg
(who is actively associated with
the SDS and RAC) for $100 to
go to a conference of the Stu-
dent Mobilization Committee to
"End "the War in Vietnam was
granted in the same bill. Surely
when students' money is being
used to finance such a contro-
versial issue they should be con-
sulted. It was suggested that"
Checks Cashed for
Rice Students
Aaron Lee
Enco Service
2361 Rice — JA 8-01481
Mechanic On Duty
Katzenburg be named official
Rice representative to the con-
ference, a conference which is
not primarily oriented to or con-
nected with the university. Be-
fore this meeting, the senate
endorsed the Vandiver-Horst-
man proposal before the student
body even knew of its existence.
It seems that the Student
Senate is less concerned with
the students, whose opinion it
ignores, than in promulgating
its own philosophies. Many sen-
ators do not actively canvass
their constituents, or give col-
lege members detailed informa-
tion as to Senate actions and,
proceedings. Many attempt to
shroud vital issues in secrecy
and do not fully inform other
students of actions and propos-
als which seriously affect the
nature of the university. There
is not enough publicity sur-
round senate actions: Thresher
reports are incomplete (e.g. no
mention of the Senate's endorse-
ment of the Vandiver-Horstman
proposal) and there is consider-
NOLEN'S
"In The Village"
2529 University
"JEWELERS FOR HOUSTON SINCE 1918
Diamonds—Watches—Charms—Cameras ■
Tape Recorders—Watch and Jewelry Repairs
Discount Prices Special Rice Jewelry
on all Diamonds JA 4-6545 In Stock and
to Rice Students Made To Order
Bernard Gold Dispensing Optician
Independent
Serving Houston Since 1962
Prescriptions, Repairs, Replacements
Eyewear & Contact Lenses
Fellow In
International Academy of Opticianry
American Board of Opticianry
In the Village Off Kirby
2525 Times Blvd. - JA 4-3676
able delay in posting of min-
utes, which are usually sketchy.
The meetings often sometimes
border on pandemonium, and it
is difficult to maintain a quo-
rum, especially when the mem-
bers are more interested in go-
ing to a basketball game than
in conducting business. Students
cannot go to the SA office and
ask to see copies of measures
passed by the Senate and be
sure of getting to; I was told
to go dig up what I wanted in
an old Thresher. One senator
stated that President Horstman
from time to time to meet with
college members because "he
has more important things to
do"—evidently more important
than finding out what the peo-
ple he works for want him to
do.
In short, it would seem that
the Student Senate is far re-
moved from the majority of stu-
dents on-campus. It ignores
them and is content to act as
if it had no responsibility to
them. The students don't have
to be consulted; there are more
important things to do, it is too
much trouble to consult them on
"little issues," and if students'
opinions do not agre with a
senator's it's just too bad—he'
doesn't "give a sihit." The abol-
ishment of'current senate struc-
ture is a. major improvement;
pefhaps in the future the SA
governing body will be more
responsive to SA members.
JIMMY DROUILHET
Baker '70
page 2—the rice thresher, February 12, 1970
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Murray, Jack. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 57, No. 18, Ed. 1 Thursday, February 12, 1970, newspaper, February 12, 1970; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth245075/m1/2/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.