I got
involved because Robert Stone recommended me to Karel Reisz. Bob knew
I was a screenwriter living in Los Angeles. I had met him and his
wife in London a few years before, and he knew that
I knew the territory in Palo Alto. I was at Stanford in the
early '60s when Ken Kesey came out of the woods from Oregon. I knew
him and I knew people in that circle.
Did reading 'Dog Soldiers' reinvigorate your memories of that period?
Yes it did. I do remember how tribal that world was. That whole thing of going off to the mountains of Mexico and having pow-wows and salvation. It was very characteristic of a time and place and of certain people.
What
was Stone's involvement in the script?
He
wrote the first draft of the screenplay, and he wasn't happy with it.
Karel neither. They decided it needed another go. Robert had had a
terrible experience with his first film being made into a movie
(WUSA, 1970), and so he was just edgy and pessimistic about the project at
that point. And so I came in, and that was that.
What
was the biggest challenge for you in writing the screenplay?
There
was so much good stuff in the novel. The biggest challenge was to get
as much of the novel on the screen as possible without cluttering the
narrative. We had to make big cuts. There's a major character called
Dieter, for instance, in the novel who owns the place in New Mexico.
He's a very colorful character in the book, and important. He comes
in very late in the story and we just couldn't figure out a way to
make it work.
Were
you at all daunted by it being such a male-oriented story, or by the
violence?
I
really wasn't, but I think sometimes I should have been! I felt that
I had two good males to guide me, Bob Stone and Karel Reisz. Stone
was such a marvelous writer that I felt I knew those characters.
I
thought he was such a smart choice, splendid. Some people said
''Karel Reisz is not an action director.'' But on the other hand, he
was a man who really knew things about the world. He had gotten out
of Czechoslovakia during the Second World War, and then as a very
young man, he went back, in the Czech Air Force of all things, after
the War. He went back mainly in search of his parents, who
unfortunately had been taken off the camps and killed. I remember
asking him one time, ''Why do you want to make this film? What do you
find interesting particularly?'' He replied ''I am interested in what
happens when a nation dishonors its war heroes.'' The title of the
book, 'Dog Soldiers', refers to the fact that some Native Indian
tribes would select certain young men and designate them as 'dog
soldiers'. They were then treated as very special beings. They got
all the best food and treats that the tribe had. But the price they
had to pay was that they had to be unstinting, and go out and die if
needed for the tribe. I think Karel saw some of this in the story of
Hicks and what had happened to him in Vietnam.
I
imagine Karel wasn't happy about the title change to 'Who'll Stop the
Rain'.
He
was very unhappy. That was so awful. It taught me that you can't just
retitle a movie after you have lived with a different one for a long
while. It's like renaming your baby. You can't do it. It's not real.
How
did the Creedence Clearwater Revival music find its way into the
movie?
Karel
found a wonderful music consultant in Tom Nolan, who was a writer and
actor. He lived in Los Angeles and wrote for Rolling Stone. Karel
told him what kind of music he wanted, and Tom was the one who came
up with the choice of music. We were very fortunate in that. We
really had a dream team. I was thinking the other day about the art
director and the set decorator. The art director was a guy called
Dale Hennesy and the set decorator was a guy named Robbie De Vestel.
They recreated the Berkeley apartment where Converse and his wife
lived. They shot the exterior of a real
house but then they recreated the interior on a set, adding space to
it for the cameras. The level of detail was just jawdropping. They
had the right kind of spices from the Berkeley Co-op. They had the
right kind of records that a couple like that would have in their
record collection. It was just amazing.
Do
you think a good adaptation is knowing when to leave material in, and
when to take out?
Well
I think it depends. There's that old rule of thumb that bad books
make good movies. It's true that if you take a book that has nothing
but plot, then there's a kind of freedom in adapting it. But I have
to say that this one worked. People often give me credit for
wonderful lines in the film, and they're just lines that I took out
of the book. I don't deserve credit for a lot of that stuff.
Were
you involved with the casting at all?
No,
but I did get to watch the casting sessions, which were fascinating.
Karel was staying at the Chateau Marmont. The actors would come to
his room and he would talk to them. Some awfully good people came.
Tommy Lee Jones among others. Karel really liked Tommy Lee as an actor and thought his Harvard background was great for Converse - but otherwise he was just too rugged a presence for the role.
The cast just turned out to be magnificent. The actor who I think doesn't get enough credit is Ray Sharkey, maybe because he died too young. He was wonderful. He was a real trooper, but everybody was. Nick Nolte worked so hard, my gosh. I think it's one of the best things he's done.
I
felt like I understood Converse best. I was a kind of graduate school
intellectual. That was the type I was the most familiar with. But I
also grew up in Idaho, and I wasn't unfamiliar with people like
Hicks. Guys who were basically very smart, shrewd and approached the
world physically.
Is
there any truth in the rumour that Stone based Nolte's character on
Neal Cassady?
I
don't think so. Neal Cassady was famous for being a big talker. I
think he was based more on someone else Bob knew in that circle. I
remember that person had been a helicopter pilot in Vietnam.
In
all your time on the movie, given this was a film about Vietnam,
about drugs and containing a certain level of violence, were you
aware of any pressure from the studio?
I
didn't worry about it at all. We thought very hard about what we put
in the movie. I didn't feel any outside pressure coming. We weren't
censoring ourselves. Only to the extent that we didn't want the
audience running out of the theatre. I knew a director called John
Flynn, who made a movie around that time called ROLLING THUNDER
(1977) where one of the villains grabs a guy's hand and shoves it
into the garbage disposal. Apparently people were running out of the
theatre and throwing up. We wanted to avoid something like that!
I've always found the scene where Michael Moriarty is tortured is
reminiscent of the scene where William Devane and his family were
terrorized in ROLLING THUNDER.
It's
interesting because our scene is very violent but by certain movie
standards, it's not. Karel plotted the scene out in such a way that
it was scary and you felt that it could easily happen to you.The scenes with Moriarty being held captive are extra scary because his captors are very unpredictable; especially Ray Sharkey's character whose stupidity makes him dangerous.
Yes, exactly. There's a scene where they have Michael Moriarty tied up, and Danskin (Richard Masur) and Smitty (Ray Sharkey) are discussing what's going to happen. Smitty is making a mayonnaise sandwich. I'll tell you what a real trooper is. Ray Sharkey did take after take of that. He went through an entire loaf of Wonder Bread and an entire quart jar of mayonnaise! Not only did he do all that, but he also managed to get a little dab of mayonnaise on his moustache in every shot!
Did
you spend much time on the set?
Not
as much as I would have liked to. I was on the set in California. I
didn't go to Mexico.
What
did you think of Karel Reisz's working methods?
What
can I say? The thing that did surprise me a little bit was that as we
were working on the script he was so meticulous about blocking the
action. For example, we would have a scene where Converse comes to
the top of the stairs, sees Hicks downstairs and walks down the
stairs. Karel would ask ''Well, does he say this line at the top of
the stairs or does he say it at the bottom of the stairs? How many
steps does he take?'' So I thought ''Gosh, he's going to be that way
when he is directing. He's going to know every shot and set-up and so
forth.'' But that wasn't true. When he got on the set, he gave the
actors a lot of leeway amd let them block it out. He would walk
around with his cameraman and find the shots he wanted to make. I
found it fascinating. It was like he had to have a storyboard
in his head, but he didn't have to follow it.
Not
so much. It depended. Some scenes he rehearsed. He did table
readings. I learned one lesson on set. Things that work on a table
reading don't necessarily work when you get up and start walking
around the set. We sometimes had to rewrite things because of that.
Was he the kind of director to fine-tune performances instead of having discussions on set?
I always felt that his relationships with his actors were very intimate. One memory of Karel is seeing him across the set, in conversation with one of the actors and you can't hear his voice. Only they can hear. When they're ready to shoot, he backs away and the camera moves in.
Did
you do any substantial rewriting while the film was in production?
I
can't remember any major rewriting.
Why
was there no love scene between Nick Nolte and Tuesday Weld in the
film?
Certainly
there is this powerful connection between Marge and Hicks, but the
only immediately obvious place to have a love scene was when they
were in the cabin in Topanga Canyon. Karel thought (and I have to say
he persuaded me) that having them bonking while the husband was being
tortured by these thugs was fairly unappetizing, and so let's not do
that. After the movie he advised me ''Shoot a love scene any place
you can grab the room for it and then you can edit it in later.'' He
was fairly sorry he didn't have a love scene in New Mexico.
He was kind about the film, but I know he was never really happy about it. He felt that we changed things that he didn't want changed. Marge’s degree of involvement in the dope smuggling scheme, for instance. He hated the title of the film. I could never get him to say the full title of the film. He always called it 'Who'll'. I never had a long conversation with him about the film, probably because I was afraid to. But let's say this. We've remained friends over all these years.
How
did you feel about the critical and commercial reaction? Roger Ebert,
for example, said it was ''...too genteel for a mean-spirited
story''.
I
don't know what to make of that. I wonder what he thought was genteel
about it? To my mind that's a very odd comment. I was really
disappointed that a film as well made and as serious and as
entertaining as that didn't do well. A few years after the movie came
out, Steven Bach, who was one of the executives at UA, wrote a book
about HEAVEN'S GATE (1980) called 'Final Cut'. He mentions in passing
that there was a big management change at United Artists and that the
marketing division hated our movie. It's possible, but it has never
been totally nailed down, that the new head of marketing deliberately
sabotaged the distribution of the movie because he had a son who had
a drug problem and he felt the film glorified drugs. The weak
box-office might have been due to the title change too.
What
exactly was Roger Spottiswoode's involvement? He's credited as the
associate producer.
He
worked with Karel as sort of a chief of staff. Roger was a very
versatile guy. He had been an editor and he was trying very hard to
make his first feature film. He'd worked in Mexico, so he was very
useful when they went down there. Somebody told me that they had
heard Roger had cut the action sequences, and I asked Roger the other
day. He said ''No, John Bloom cut the action sequences.''
Roger
and you have now collaborated on a lot of films together. What is it
about him that makes it a good collaborator?
I
don't know. We just work together well. He is a writer, and he
manages to be so supportive and nice. He manages to be critical in a
gentle way. He's an angel director! He's just very congenial to work
with. The first feature he made was something called TERROR TRAIN
(1981), and although I didn't get credit, I rewrote the script for
that. That was a hilarious adventure from top to bottom in Montreal.
The streets were literally ringing with gunfire because Canadian
productions had just gotten new tax breaks and people were shooting
movies everywhere.
What
are you the proudest about regarding the film?
I'm
just proud that I was on a good movie. Did I have some lightning
solution to something? If I did I can't remember.
Why
do you think the film has lasted?
I
think it's because it is a good movie. I watched it the other day and
I was surprised that it didn't date at all. It was of its day but it
was very honest and it didn't try to be more with it or less with it.
It told its story in a straightforward fashion. You know, I think the
problems we addressed in the film are still with us.
If
you could go back and change anything about the film, what would it
be?
I
think I'd put in that love scene! Also, there's a scene in the movie
where they get down to Topanga and Nick Nolte digs up a box of guns.
Tuesday Weld is sitting there next to him. Karel said ''Wouldn't she
react more to his digging up a box of guns?'' I said I didn't think
so because A) she's stoned all the time and B) us Americans don't get
so excited about guns. I'm haunted by the fact I could have been
wrong. Nobody has ever complained to me about it.
The
film is psychologically realistic I believe. I also believe humans
adapt very easily to situations that may seem incredible to us.
Well,
that's what I tend to think too. People just get along. I have an
unbelievable story. Around that time I was living in San Francisco
and I was a freelance magazine writer. I got an assignment from
McCall's magazine and they wanted me to go talk with the wives of
Black Panthers and white policemen. I said ''For gun cleaning tips?
What are you talking about?'' I remember climbing over sandbags at
the Panther headquarters saying ''Hi! I'm Judy Rascoe. I'm from
McCalls!''
Do
you remember seeing the film for the first time?
I saw
a lot of the film in post-production, but I remember watching a fine
cut of the movie in a little screening room and thinking it was
fantastic. I looked at Bob Stone and said ''What do you think?'' and
he replied something like ''Pretty damn good''. I said ''Bob, we are
in a room full of people just waiting to hear from you, please say
that louder!''
I spoke to Judith by phone on 14 May 2014 and would like to thank her for her time.
Thanks to Scott Bradley.
(C) Paul Rowlands
Thanks to Scott Bradley.
No comments:
Post a Comment