Sluggin’ It Out With James Gunn: Part One

As you probably know, both Rue Morgue staff and Rue Morgue readers (via a message board poll) chose Slither as the best horror film of 2006. The Descent was a close second – for both groups – but the staff felt Slither was just bit more special for demonstrating so much ambition in bringing back the ‘80s splatter and taking it to the next level. (And I’m sure on a subconscious level I was rooting for it ‘cause star Nathan Fillion also hails from Edmonton – ha!)
Anyhow, Slither is also one of those films really divides people. Judging by reviews I’ve read, letters to the magazine and posts on the RM boards, it seems you’re either into that world of sticky horror-comedy or it’s a turn off. I dig it. What kills me are those people who act all aghast that anyone could possibly like this film because it’s not scary enough, not serious enough, not bloody enough or not whatever enough. It’s like hating a pineapple because it’s not a pumpkin. A lot of movies in the genre don’t aspire to be the progeny of TCM.
When I judge a film, I always take into account what it’s trying to accomplish (or I think it’s trying to accomplish) and adjust my judgment of it accordingly. By my account, Slither is a love letter to ‘80s splatter, but with a more modern sensibility. Mission accomplished with flying colours (and slime).
Thinking about Slither again, I remembered that I had a lot of interview material left over from my Q&A phoner with director James Gunn (RM#55). It was one of those interviews that went really well and much longer than anticipated. Alas, there were only three pages available for the piece because it was a very last-minute addition to the mag after we scored a screener shortly before deadline.
Reading the original transcript over again, I realized there’s some good stuff that got cut, so it’s going to see the light of day here for the first time. I’ve divided it up into two parts, which I’ll post separately, just to keep it to a reasonable length. Taken out of context, it jumps around a bit, some of the quotes are additional parts of answers to questions in the feature and of course it’s a bit raw, but that’s how she goes.

The second part, which I’ll post shortly, is more cohesive, as I talked to Gunn for a while about the Dawn of the Dead remake – especially those oh-so controversial running zombies he wrote into the script.
But first, more on Slither!

Did you have a hand in casting the film?
Oh yeah, 100 per cent; all those casting choices are mine.

Same for the music?
I wanted the music to be really over the top, like the rest of the movie. I wanted it to be like an old Hitchcock/Bernard Herrmann score, and [producer] Paul [Brooks] let me do it, so we’ll see if people like that at all. But he really did give me total freedom. I was very, very lucky to come into a first-time directing gig and being given so much leeway.

What did your early years at Troma teach you?
I came from a background working on movies that were $300 000 at Troma, so I know what it’s like to produce a film where you have to be careful of the budget, so I was really careful with my days, and not going over [budget], and not spending too much money, because later on, when I needed to do an effect after the movie was done that was going to cost $30 000 but was really important and I argued for it, the producers knew I was arguing for something that was truly important because I’m not arguing for every little thing in the movie. I had to pick my battles to some degree, and I had to be my own watchdog in terms of keeping the budget on track.
Honestly, I think Lloyd was really important in creating the splatter comedy. He invented that genre to a great degree. With The Toxic Avenger there’s no doubt that those early Peter Jackson and Sam Raimi movies were influenced by Troma, which they’ve acknowledged. I think there’s some of that over-the-topness that Lloyd taught me never to be afraid of. Lloyd was never about restraint.

Did working at Troma make it harder or easier for you to get into Hollywood?
It didn’t affect me one way or the other. It only affected me in terms of what I learned. I got my start in a way that was completely unrelated. When I worked at Troma, I’d go home and write screenplays. After I worked ten or eleven hours I’d go home and work another three or four writing screenplays, and I eventually wrote a screenplay I thought I was really going out with, and thing kind of caught on in Hollywood. A few months after writing the specials, I got a lot of work. Joss Whedon hired me to write a pilot for Fox and Jay Roach hired me to write a movie for Warner Brothers. It truly was an overnight success story. Although I love Troma, it really had nothing to do with Tromeo & Juliet [which Gunn wrote and co-directed], which is strange because in the end Tromeo & Juliet was a much, much more successful film than The Specials was [Gunn’s superhero comedy]. Tromeo & Juliet played for a year in Los Angeles at midnight screenings, so it was very successful for a $300 000 film. The Specials cost over a $1 000 000 and it played for two weeks.

It sounds like The Specials was a bad experience.
There are lot of things I like about it, but there’s also a lot of things I don’t like about it, and there’s a lot of behind-the-scenes arguing and romance and infidelity, and all this other kind of stuff that was going on behind the scenes of The Specials that was really what I was involved with at the time – much more so than making the movie. It was a, a… opportunity. That’s all I can think of it.

Let’s talk about Michael Rooker.
He’s a great guy, and a great find. I also knew that Rooker is like one of these cult idols that has kinda gone under the radar. People talk about Bruce Campbell all the time, and Bruce Campbell is great, but here we have this guy, he’s done all these genre movies, great roles in all these small films, and he’s fantastic in even the worst movies.

This must be his most physically demanding role yet.
I actually did background checks on all of the actors, because I knew it was going to be physically rigorous.

[end of part one]