Exclusive Interview: Jeff Broadstreet, director Night of the Living Dead 3D

By Scott Rosenberg Nov 26, 2006, 12:22 GMT

Jeff Broadstreet (left), Sid Haig (right)

Recently released in the USA was 'Night of the Living Dead 3D,' a re-imaging of George Romero’s 1968 classic horror movie.

Director Jeff Broadstreet was kind enough to sit down with Monsters and Critics to talk about the new movie and the latest in 3D technology – is it only a marketing tool or a new innovation in technology:

The interview follows:

M&C:  Your filmography shows your experience with horror/sci-fi genre film.  What is it about that genre that you like? Ever going to break away from that genre?

JB:  Well, my first feature, "Sexbomb", was a horror/comedy with the emphasis on the comedy.  And, I like the Film Noir genre almost as much as horror and science fiction.  My favorite films are "Dr. Strangelove", "Touch of Evil" and "Double Indemnity"-- a political dark comedy and two film noirs.  But, the films that influenced me the most growing up, watching them on TV in the rural Midwest were "Earth vs. The Flying Saucers", "Forbidden Planet" and "The Day the Earth Stood Still".  Those films have stood up really well, especially "Forbidden Planet" and "Day".

"Earth vs. The Flying Saucers" was more of B-movie when it was made, but it certainly has some iconic images.  I don't really want to break out of the sci-fi/horror genre. It's what I love.  I love making films with CG visual effects and special makeup effects. I love designing the effects and then shooting them on the set.  I'd like to do a film noir, but there aren't very many being made because they're hard to pull off now - everybody's seen the staples of the genre.  You have to give it a fresh spin.  Film noirs are still being made from time to time, with varying degrees of success.

M&C:  With 'Night of the Living Dead 3D' you have taken a classic horror flick by a noted film director (George Romero) and re-imaged the feature with new script. Those are big shoes to fill - aren't you concerned about critical feedback?

JB:  Of course we were concerned about critical feedback.  As soon as I signed on to direct ‘Night of the Living Dead: 3D’ (NOTLD 3D), I told the executive producer and Robert Valding, the screenwriter, that the the hard-core Romero fans aren't going to be happy that the film was being re-made. I knew that we would get a certain amount of bad reviews, it was a given.  

Our goal was to make the best film we could with the resources we were given -- this film was shot in under 20 under days AND IN 3-D.  I think we've made a pretty good small film.  I'm proud of it.  It's got a good, clever script.  The actors are good, I think this is one of Sid Haig's best performances (plays Gerald Tovar, Jr. in movie); it's as good as his work in the two Rob Zombie movies.  And those were much bigger films in terms of budget and shooting days. 

The critics who are reviewing this film are holding it to a different standard because NOTLD 3D has a theatrical release, but it's a small film, which means it can't compete from a polished production values standpoint with $100 million dollar Hollywood blockbusters.
 
I can take a bad review if it is objectively, professionally written. We didn't get a great review in “Variety", but it was objective and professional.  So far, (NOTLD 3D has only been in
limited release in the U.S. and Canada) we have gotten positive reviews in the "LA Weekly" and on "Ain't It Cool News.com". 

The reaction to the film so far has been a "love it" or "hate it" reaction.  I've seen this film at
sold-out screenings where the audience really dug it.

Sid Haig and I were talking earlier in the week about these reviews.  Sid called it the "sacred cow" effect -- remaking Romero's film.  Bob Valding and I both like the original NOTLD and tried to make our film a homage of sorts.

Finally it's important for reviewers to realize that a 3-D film has to move at a more deliberate pace because of the nature of 3-D filmmaking.  You can't have a lot of quick cuts.  You can actually, but the 3-D won't be effective.  On every cut, you have to give the audience a little time to adjust to the new shot, the brain has to process the difference in depth
in each individual shot.  

For my final comment on reviews and critical reaction to my film, your readers should check out our screenwriter Bob Valding's blog at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUn_94Me5y0

In this blog, Bob reads part of a very harsh review where the reviewer quotes a line of dialogue and jeers at Bob for his bad writing -- the line the reviewer quotes isn't
even in the movie.

M&C:  So after your 'Alien Interview' doco in 1997, do you believe we have been visited by others from "out there"?

JB: Having been out to "Area 51" twice, I believe that Unidentified Flying Craft have been seen countless times around the world since 1947 – whether these craft are piloted by beings from another world has yet to be proven.

M&C:  You were born in the heartland of America which marches to the drum of a different beat then America's big urban areas. Does this make it difficult for you to feel the pulse of what "scares" mainstream film audiences in the larger urban areas?

JB: I moved to Los Angeles right after I got out of college, so I've actually lived in Los
Angeles longer now than in Indiana where I was born and raised.  As far as what scares people, the Bush administration has done a pretty good job of trying to scare the crap out of people since 9/11.  When people are genuinely on edge in their real lives, they want an
escape valve and horror movies provide that.

M&C:  What are those elements that must be present (plot, music, gruesome looking characters, etc) to have a truly horrific film?

JB:  It all comes down to the story and how the audience reacts to the cinematic world you have created for them for 90 minutes.  Music is usually very important, but you can also create tension by the lack of music as well.  Gruesome looking characters are effective in a "movie-movie" type of film, where the audience knows what they’re watching doesn't have much of a link to the "real" world, the "unstoppable killer" cliché.  The mundane can also be very effective in creating a horrific film.  It's the elements/ingredients you add to that mundane world that make it horrific.  Look at Ed Gein (‘The Butcher of Plainfield’ -- the basis for ‘Psycho’ and ‘The Texas Chainsaw Massacre’).

M&C:  Horror films seem to be popular now-a-days around the world.  Why do we humans like to be scared? Is film a better medium to accomplish this rather than say reading a good horror novel?

JB:  As I mentioned previously, the Bush White House has done a real good job of scaring the bejezzus out of everybody.  Ever notice how the Terror Alerts always seemed to go up a notch (or color) whenever there was some bad news/scandal that they were trying to get off the front page of the paper or out of the cable news cycle.  Film is more of a mass medium. 
People like to be scared in the dark in a movie theatre. Stephen King still seems to be doing pretty well.

M&C:  Lets talk technology a bit, a few years ago the big technology push was "digital", now that Hollywood has achieved a certain momentum in digital production and roll out of films the latest technology "flavor of the week" is 3D digital. Are we really dealing with advances in technology here or are these just gimmicky marketing tools being used by the studios and film makers?

JB:   No, we are dealing with big advances in technology. The high definition cameras that are coming out are just getting better and better.  Jim Cameron is going to make his next film in 3-D high def and this will be the biggest, most ambitious and probably the best 3-D film ever made.  He has proven himself to be a real innovator and I can't wait to see what he comes up with.  Cameron has developed his own polarized 3-D system and it will most likely be state-of-the-art.  The anaglyph (red/blue) system we used on NOTLD 3D is somewhat out-dated compared to IMAX or Real-D, but it is the system that is financially viable for a small film. 

Dimension Films released "Spy Kids 3-D" in anaglyph and that was a $30 million dollar film.  People don't realize you have to bring in a silver screen to the theatre and have dual-synced
projectors for most polarized systems.  

M&C:  Do you see a full revival of the 3D movie craze that existed back in the 1950's? Short quiz - what was the first 3D movie?  If you said 'It came from Outer Space' you are correct. - now when you go off and re-make that movie - I want a producer's credit ;-)

JB:  I don’t see a “full revival” of a 3-D movie craze.  What I think you’re going to see from directors like Jim Cameron are 3-D “event” movies.  Cameron’s in the “event” movie business anyway, so I think he’s embracing the technology to show moviegoers something that they haven’t seen before. When you see a well made 3-D film in a state-of-art polarized format, the results can be pretty astounding.

The U.S. Premiere for NOTLD 3D was at the World 3-D Expo and so far it has been our only polarized screening. The crowd at the Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood loved it and the film looked fantastic. 

Actually, ‘It Came from Outer Space’ was not the first 3-D movie.  It’s not even the first American 3-D feature.  ‘Bwana Devil’ (1952) was the first 3-D American feature that kicked off the 3-D craze in the early 1950s.  ‘It Came from Outer Space’ came out in 1953.

The first 3-D feature film was Nat Deverich’s 1922 feature, ‘Power of Love.’  The first feature length sound 3-D movie was the Italian film, ‘Nozze Vagabonde’ (1936).  The closest I think you’re going to get with your answer would be ‘It Came from Outer Space’ was the first American science fiction film in 3-D, but good try ;-)

 M&C:  What is your next project?

JB:  Nothing that I can formally announce right now, but it looks like it will be a movie for The Sci Fi Channel. 

M&C:  Any pointers for young people that want to break into making movies?

JB:  Make a film. And with Final Cut Pro and a relatively cheap digital camera you can do
some pretty cool stuff without spending a ton of money. Or get a job as a PA on a feature.

You’ve got to see and experience! first hand what it’s like working on a movie.  It’s hard work , very long hours, the tension and pressure can be incredible, but when a film works — you get a rush that is rarely experienced in other types of jobs.  That’s why everybody wants to be in movies. 

Once again Jeff, thanks for talking with us.