|
|
|
 Banner by Wes Vance |
||
|
Daniel Pearl started his career lensing a classic, and 34 years later, is at the top of his profession with an extensive list of credits that includes film, music videos, commercials, and concert films. Hired by Tobe Hooper to shoot THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE, Pearl became a pioneer in both film and music videos in the 1980s and 1990s with credits such as shooting The Police's EVERY BREATH YOU TAKE, U2's WITH OR WITHOUT YOU, and Guns N' Roses' NOVEMBER RAIN to name a few. His career came full circle when he photographed the remake of CHAINSAW in 2003. Since then Pearl has worked on several films of the genre, and just may be heading to Camp Crystal Lake. In this Colonel's Crypt exclusive, the legendary cinematographer discusses his career in detail and provides a unique, detailed, and intimate insight into the world of cinematography.
COLONEL'S CRYPT: What to you is the definition of horror? DANIEL PEARL: I’ve always felt although I’ve broken my own rule by doing ALIEN VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM in that what defines a good horror is something that could actually happen. DRACULA, FRANKENSTEIN, although I love those films as a kid, they don’t really scare me because there is no DRACULA, there is no FRANKENSTEIN. But you look at THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE the people are whacked enough that could happen, that’s truly horrific. People have to be so twisted and perverse to do something like this is very horrifying when it is something that could really happen. There was a line that I drew for a long time, but I remember Ridley Scott’s ALIEN in how mind blowing it was as a movie. I have so much respect for it and so I was honored to be a part of that franchise to make this film so I went for it. Still for me, I know there’s no ALIEN and there is no PREDATOR, that stuff doesn’t really take me on quite the same ride as THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE or a lot of other films where things really could happen. CC: Is the original TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE the work you are most recognized for? DP: It is something that I am pretty well known for but oddly enough, frequently people I am working with or photographing for are not aware that I shot the film. I’ve had a very fortunate career with some landmark moments but for sure the reason that I have a career today in film I owe that to the fact that I shot the original TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE when I was 23 years old. It was 1973. I was told that I couldn’t get into the film business at that time, it was father and son in the craftsman's trade. There are only a limited number of television stations, only three major networks and maybe there were a dozen or two dozen other stations in the United States, the bigger cities had one or two independent stations. There were major studios, so there weren’t the opportunities that there are today to work. The demand in Hollywood wasn’t as close as it is today. So I was actually on course to become a film professor. I went and got an undergraduate degree and then a master’s degree. I fully accepted the fact if I was fortunate enough I could make films on the weekends and get grants to make films in the summer, make movies, short films, something. Three weeks after getting my master’s degree I had shot a few commercials locally in Austin, Texas. Fortunately for me, some of the work I’ve done caught Tobe Hooper’s eye and he thought I was the best cameraman in Texas so he hired me to shoot THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE and once that was released I was in the film business full fledged. I went out to Los Angeles and bought some equipment and I had some friends who had gone out there to try to get work into the industry. They invited me to a party where I met people that were working with Roger Corman, another similar production company that wanted me in their office and I started my career in Hollywood, dream come true. CC: The original TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE was shot on 16mm for the budget but since then you’ve worked specifically with 35mm. DP: The original TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE back in 1973 when we shot in, there were very few lightweight, handheld able, blimp meaning soundproof cameras, cameras that weren’t noisy, they were called a blimp camera. They had only just invented, Arri had one called the Arriflex 35BL, BL for Blitz, and Panavision had one called the Panaflex. These cameras both were pretty heavy they but were handhold able. The normal sync cameras would weigh 160 pounds, these were in the 30 pound range. 16mm you could do this in the teens or twenty pounds and that was very much the shooting style that Tobe wanted, it was definitely something we had to be able to shoot, this handheld, cinema verite kind of style. Not that we wanted to shot 16mm but of course the original budget for THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE was $80,000. It was shot for that, something happened in post production that made the budget go from $80,000 to $120,000, there was a mistake in post production and they had to spend a lot of money to recover from the mistake. It was basically not by design. What happened was the negative film when normally we shoot on a 35mm negative and make a positive image, the negative film in 16mm was declared way too grainy for me to shoot it and blow it up to 35mm which is what all films were released upon on in those days. I had to shoot a very fine grain film called Eastman Kodak ECL, I believe it was number 7252 I think it was. In order to be fine grained, it was not very sensitive to light. The reason I am telling you this whole story is when I shoot a film today in 35mm, I require 1/16th for minimum exposure to do a scene at night, to shoot it wide open on a lens, meaning a lens is accepting as much light as I can let it accept. I had to be sixteen times brighter than I have to be today to shoot an equivalent scene. I attribute looking back at it now, we wanted a verite look. We got a verite look. I didn’t know how to light anywhere near like I know how to light today. How could I, I consider my career starting around the time of that film. Today I am now 35 years later where I know a lot more about how to light than I did. The look of the original TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE, I attribute it to the little amount I knew about lighting. I contribute it to the less than state of the art equipment that I was able to lay my hands on. I attribute some of that to the fact that the film was so insensitive to lights, that I had to light things really directly. I couldn’t do anything free, I had to use the light very efficiently, I couldn’t be bouncing the light or putting it through silks or things like that to give the light different quality. I basically had to blast the light on it. A lot of the look was based on those situations. I have to say that I had some very good lighting ideas. There’s a scene played out in the headlights of the car at night. It was an idea that I had, a notion that I had to light something that came across really well, backlight and the smoke and make it play. Something I saw one night when we were leaving the set and a car was driving towards us and I saw it in the smoke with these huge headlights and I thought “Oh wow, we have to play a scene like that” but for the most part I didn’t know a lot about lighting and a lot of the lighting look of the film has to do with those three things, inexperience, the technology I had available to me, and just the way I had to deal with the light in getting enough light just to shoot. Having said that, the composition and the camera moves, of course that’s stuff worked out between myself and Tobe Hooper, but that’s something that I believe is true for my case in that it’s almost intuitive that you know how to compose and to design good moves. I feel that is something that you have. You can practice to get better and better at it but you have to be born with that, a good composition and intuition. CC: As a cinematographer, how much input are you given for a project in terms of working in conjunction with the director? DP: That can range from one extreme to the other, one extreme being that the director has already pre-visualized everything. He’s drawn out storyboards, he knows what millimeter lens, he knows exactly what the shot wants to be, he knows exactly where the camera goes, he has a complete vision of it in which case your job is to realize his vision. The other extreme is the director may say “Look, I work with actors.” I’m working on a picture being directed by Bobby Moresco. Bobby wants to work with the actors and deal with the story, he’s a writer. He co-wrote MILLION DOLLAR BABY and he co-wrote and won the Academy Award for CRASH. He wants to work with the actors and he lets me design the shots. I design everything. I pick the lighting, I pick the placement, what’s in the shot, what’s out of the shot, where do we see it from, what moves does it make, so that relationship depending upon project to project, director to director, can change where sometimes it’s all him, sometimes it’s all me, and sometimes it’s a collaboration. I have to say that the most interesting and fun stuff to do is when it’s a 50/50 collaboration. That’s the place where you both spin off of each other, that’s good fun. Not to say that I’m not having fun on this one because he and I just spin off each other as filmmakers, we could bounce off of each other, but I have more than 50 percent of the responsibility of the imagery on this job. Having explained that to you, it can even change within a day when you are on the same job with the same director. You may come to work in the morning and the director knows exactly what he wants, he doesn’t want to deviate from it, he has it thought out this is exactly how he wants to shoot this sequence. And then you get that done by lunchtime, you come back from lunch and he goes “I don’t know, I can’t get my head around this. What do you think we should do?” It could totally change from sequence to sequence, film to film, and director to director. CC: Speaking of directors, there’s one you’ve had a great collaboration with recently and that is with Marcus Nispel, who you worked with on the remake of TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE. There’s a very unique look in that film as well. How did you attain that particular look on the remake? DP: I did shoot it pretty normally. I do have a certain contrast ratio that I like, and I light to those ratios, those directions and quality in light that I like, so I use that, those qualities. As far as manipulating the photography and the negative, there are no nets on there however I did skip bleach on the prints. Our original answer print was done at Technicolor in Los Angeles. Ultimately the release prints were handled at DeLuxe, a film lab in Hollywood under the supervision of a wonderful woman named Bev Wood who saw to it that I got what Marcus and I were looking for on that which was to desaturate it a little bit, get the blacks to be a bit chunky, a bit heavier than they might normally be, pull some of the vibrancy of the color. Marcus felt that Texas in the summertime, the sky was too blue and the grass was too green. He didn’t want it to be so vibrant and happy, so we did what we could in the art direction and wardrobe, and also on the positive where we made the release prints, we did a thing called bleach bypass which alters the chemical treatment of the film prints, leaving more of the silver, the light sensitive material, leaving it more attached to the film. It had this result of lowering the color saturation and making the blacks a bit stronger and making the whites appear more silvery. CC: How were you approached with the remake? DP: I was shooting virtually everything Marcus was doing at the time he signed on to do the film. It started out as one of four cameramen then it became three than two and then I became the guy that was doing everything with him, which were commercials and the odd music video. He’s a very smart man and he hired me because knew two things about me that I wasn’t totally aware of myself. He knew that I was the one guy in the world who would not try to copy the original. I’ve already done that. There was nothing for me to prove by shooting something in that style, which was funny because the producers didn’t want to hire me for the remake initially, it was a big, long drawn out battle. He just kept insisting they hire me. It’s quite humorous ultimately because Michael Bay is producing and I had shot very important music videos for him that got him into the feature business. I had shot some very important music videos for Marcus Nispel. I had shot the original film. They didn’t want to hire me, they wanted this guy and that guy. Marcus kept insisting upon me knowing that I would not just simply try the same thing. You have to remember at this point in time in 2002, everybody’s got bad memories of the remake of PSYCHO which oddly enough was based upon the same character Ed Gein. There were variations of the Ed Gein story. PSYCHO was remade where they tried to copy it shot for shot with a modern day cast, it was a disaster. People really were concerned about that kind of thing so Marcus knew that I would not do that. I had a very good career going shooting music videos, and I feel like from that I am somewhat responsible in that MTV and music video trained a more efficient visually intelligent or acute audience that can take visuals that are more graphic, more brightly lit and flatly lit so you can see everything. You can take images that are fast paced and I really do believe that 25 years of MTV has really changed the audience. So anyhow, the other thing that Marcus counted on was that he knew that TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE was why I was in the film business, why I wasn’t a film professor. It’s basically I attribute my whole career, my success as a filmmaker to having made that film. That put me in the game. He knew I had told him that Tobe Hooper, when he signed on to do TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE 2, I tried to talk him out of directing it. I was shooting the remake of INVADERS FROM MARS with him and his next project was to be TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE 2. I said “Tobe don’t do it.” He said “What do you mean?” I go “You have done this successfully.” Tobe’s career has had a lot of ups and downs. I said “If you go and do TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE a second time and you don’t do it well, you’ve offered up on a platter as if you’ve never did it if you don’t kill it.” Marcus was clever enough to trick me into putting myself in that position and he knew that I had to kill it. I had no choice. If I couldn’t do that film and do it better than I did it the first time, then I wasn’t who I pretended to be really or who I thought of myself as. He knew that I would kill it. It’s funny because the producers when I came in and sat down the first time in Texas with the producers, they go “So it’s going to be gritty and grainy like the original?” I went “No.” They went “Well, what do you mean no?” I went “Well do you want to shoot 16mm?” They go “Are you crazy? We’re not shooting 16mm. This is a five million dollar below the line picture.” I told them “Well guys, if we’re not shooting 16mm then we’re not going to be gritty and grainy like the original cause that’s how I get that look. You want me to take a perfectly good looking 35mm and make it look like that? That’s not how you do it. I’m going to give you a different look. I’m going to give you something that’s more contemporary. I did that already and there’s no point in me to do it again.” They were a little worried after that meeting I remember but by the time we came to it they said “Daniel, this is a five million dollar movie but it looks like a forty million dollar movie. We can’t believe what you’re doing here, it’s beyond our comprehension what you’re doing.” CC: I can say from remembrance that when it was announced that you were shooting the remake, there was I felt a collective sigh of relief from the TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE fans in that being you worked on the original, some fans felt that your involvement would make sure that the remake would be done right. DP: It’s interesting because the producers I told you who didn’t want me in the first place went through this routine where one of their beefs was since I did the original and the movie’s successful, it’d be all about me. I’m going “Well guys, I can’t erase myself. I don’t know what to tell you. I’m taking this job because Marcus Nispel is my buddy. He’s a guy I shoot everything he does anyhow. I believe he’s going to make a good film, that’s why I’m on it. He asked me to do it, I have a good career working with him, and that’s what we’re doing.” Two weeks into the movie, AIN’T IT COOL NEWS, everybody’s bitching about “Oh they’re remaking TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE. Is it going to be sacrilege just like PSYCHO? Are they going to mess it up? Is nothing sacred, can’t they just leave it alone?” This was going on from a month before shooting up until about two weeks into it and all of a sudden somebody writes one night “Wait a second. They got Daniel Pearl shooting this thing. Maybe it’s not going to be a mess. Maybe it’s not going to be that horrible. Maybe it’s going to be something cool.” The whole probe changed. The next day off the producers come to me and go “Danny, remember when we told you we were worried that you might get all the press? We have to confess now that we were wrong on that.” They explained to me how the tone of the whole public changed and now people were looking forward to what will the guy who shot the original, what’s he going to do with the remake. The producers were worried about me getting all the press to begin and now it’s switched to them wanting me to do interviews twice a day while we were doing the movie. CC: Would you say that’s some vindication on your part in terms of the result of the film, the box office success? DP: I think they’re both good films. I don’t even think just because you’ve seen one, you shouldn’t see the other. I think they both have their own validity in their work. CC: Now the big news recently is that Marcus Nispel has signed on to direct a remake of FRIDAY THE 13TH. Given your association with Marcus, will you sign on as cinematographer? DP: Marcus has been in touch with me plenty to talk about it. He has asked me to shoot it. One of the producers called me to talk to me in principle about me shooting it, that they want me to do it. It’s the same producer who wanted me to do interviews while I was shooting the TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE remake. I imagine it’s going to come to pass, I haven’t signed a contract yet so I don’t know. CC: Ah ok. DP: I actually was going to ask you, what do you think, do you think I should do it? CC: You’re asking me? DP: Well here I am, I’ve done the original TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE. I’ve done the remake. Now if I go in and do a remake of somebody else’s film, are Marcus and I offering ourselves on a platter? CC: I feel honored that you’re asking my opinion. Remakes don’t necessarily bother me as long as they’re done well. I have a particular love for FRIDAY THE 13TH and like HALLOWEEN I think it’s a franchise I feel that needs to start over again. DP: I think we’ll do a good job, I’m pretty sure about that. CC: With the way you both handled TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE I know that it will be handled with care and respect. Knowing at how other websites and how they react to remakes, I may be in the minority in that opinion but then again I think they’ve been proven wrong on more on a lot of instances. DP: Listening to you say that, I think probably what you’re saying is true. I haven’t had anybody who didn’t think we didn't do a good job on the TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE remake. People like it and in particular people like the photography of it and people did like the film. I think it will probably be received pretty well as long as we do a good job which is course is always our ambition on why we do it. CC: I wanted to ask about your music video career. Are there any music videos you consider your favorites? DP: It’s funny because you asked me if I’m identified most for TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE but I’ve been fortunate in that I’ve hit a few home runs in several other genres. In music videos, off the top of my head Michael Jackson’s BILLIE JEAN, I don’t think there’s anybody on the planet who hasn’t seen that. When I meet people around the world and I tell them I’m a cinematographer, they asked me if they’ve anything I’ve shot and I say it’s impossible not to have. I can’t imagine there’d be more views than that. The Police’s EVERY BREATH YOU TAKE was another one, I won the first ever MTV Music Award for Best Cinematography for that. The two that I quite like now, it would be the Fugees’ READY OR NOT which I did with Marcus, I really think it’s a great video. I like the song. I really like the look of it. The other one that I like quite a bit is Meatloaf’s I’D DO ANYTHING FOR LOVE (BUT I WON’T DO THAT) which I shot that for Michael Bay, he was the director for that. Those are my two favorites. The interesting thing about music videos is that if you have a good track, a good song, we somehow rise to the occasion and make good videos out of good songs. Thank God for that, that we manage to get that part right. CC: You’ve also shot a lot of concerts. Is there a lot more spontaneity in shooting a live concert as opposed to shooting films and music videos? DP: A lot more spontaneity because I’ve done them with film crews, and film directors, so we are not that scripted in our shots. It’s much more spontaneous however there’s a much more different approach when you work with TV directors who actually will script out the photography and plan out the shots. We’ll come in and shoot for two to three nights and shoot it basically with eight to sixteen cameras in sort of a documentary style where everybody’s doing their own thing, shooting their stuff. The directors have the video feeds from our film cameras and they would be talking to us as we’re doing it but they wouldn’t be telling us “Camera two, set up on a close up of this guy” or “Camera three, do this” so it’s not run like a TV shoot so there’s a lot of spontaneity. Having said that, I haven’t shot a concert in several years so I don’t know if they’re doing them the way we were doing them. CC: Is there any particular concert you enjoyed above all? DP: I have to think about that, there’s so many. CC: It’s quite an amazing list. DP: I’ve been very fortunate to have worked with some of the major people in pop and rock music. It’s been great, even I’m blown away by the list. Have you heard of a festival called Camerimage? CC: I have heard of it. DP: It’s a festival in Poland that’s the only film festival in the world that’s all about cinematography. It starts the weekend after Thanksgiving and it goes on for nine days. Last year they wanted to expand the festival, it was always about features. It would be where there would be three feature film awards on cinematography, one for best Polish feature, one for best European feature, and one for best Worldwide Feature. They would also give out a lifetime achievement award to a feature cinematographer. Last year they decided to expand the festival and make it bigger so they decided to bring in short films but then they also decided that music videos were the most happening thing in short films, so to introduce this, somehow decided to give me the lifetime achievement award for my music video work. I had shot 421 music videos. There was a Polish musician there who presented the award to me and he actually had printed out all the acts on this big scroll of paper that he went “I’m going to tell you some of the people that Daniel’s worked with.” He began to read this thing and he dropped the paper and it rolled across the stage. It went on for quite some time in reading the acts. I was privileged and honored to work with such fantastic talents. The collective talent of the people I’ve photographed, of course some of them extremely beautiful, especially the women. To photograph a woman and do a good job, it’s a form of flirtation. I’m not saying it’s sexual but they’re beautiful and you’re making them more beautiful. They have to trust you and make them feel comfortable and it makes them let out their inner beauty and that’s when you really have nailed it. It’s quite a fantastic thing to go through, to experience that, to work with someone and they look in play and see themselves and go “Oh my god, it’s fantastic.” It’s just fantastic, it’s great. CC: Being that you’ve particularly with film over the past thirty years, what is your opinion of the rise of digital technology today with HD and MiniDV? DP: I’ve never shot anything truly digital. I’ve done a little bit of lighting for Miriah Carey, Janet Jackson, and Shania Twain when they would release an album, they’d hire me to light them for some public appearances, televised appearances or receiving an award, for interviews or press kits so they would look the EPK for the new album. As far as a concert or a feature film, sure, I’ve never shot with digital. I’ve never even shot with these newest cameras like Panasonic Genesis, the Red, or the Viper. I only just in May I bought my first digital Nitron for myself. My opinion is I think the technology could be coming along pretty well. I’m going to be straight with you and most people won’t be this straight in talking about it, but I do feel like when we are cinematographers and we are exposing film, we’re considered a bit of magician. We’re all baited so we all get cast. We all buy our clothes so we can pick out a wardrobe. Not everybody considers themselves a photographer and that wasn’t considered the case, so we were magicians that have a skill that everybody just doesn’t have. So when we say it should be lit this way, it should be done that way, people by and large listen to us. As cinematographers, we go from one project to the next. We stay hot. Directors don’t necessarily stay that way. It might take them a year or two between projects. We meaning the leading cinematographers of the world I think are very important collaborators. What I’m afraid happens is that with the F stop we have to decide how to expose the film. The problem is the whole dialogue about digital and the new technologies of image captures are about low quantities that you don’t need so much light, we don’t need this, we don’t need that, it’s cheaper, it’s faster, and all that. We’re not about quantity of light, yes we measure quantity of light because that’s something we have to do technically in order to expose film. We’re about ratios, quality of light, contrasts, setting mood and tone with light. We’re not just is there enough light to shoot. We’re way past that. That’s something that we do for the first couple of years of our careers. We move way beyond is there enough to what is the quality of the light. How is it telling the story? Is it helping the story? What is building? The direction of light, the color of light, the quality of light, and I think that the whole thing gets dumbed down. For example, I had a producer call me up, I was in Russia shooting CAPTIVITY with Roland Joffe directing. The producer said “I heard you’re in Russia. I want to know what it’s like.” Personally I think Russia is like being in hell myself and I told him that. My father’s people are Russian but I hated Russia, it was terrible. Anyhow, I said the guy “Tell me what you’re doing” and he told me he was shooting a forty million dollar movie in HD. “Why would you shoot it in HD?” He goes “I did a movie and it worked out well.” I said “How did it look,” and he went “Daniel, we had to shoot a school bus at night and the DP needed only one 5K.” I started laughing my ass off and he asked me why I was laughing so I told him “I asked you how it looked and you told me you needed only one 5K. You didn’t answer my question. You just responded with how little you needed.” I could shoot on film. I could shoot above one 5K. We just choose not to. There’s a long roundabout answer but right away the producer takes these devices and it become about quantity. How much light you need, how fast you can go, if you need less light and less money, you can go faster which is for less money. That’s not what a cinematographer is about. A cinematographer is about creating a feeling, an emotion, a mood with light and with a camera. My fear is that right away if this catches on, a lot of the greatest cinematographers that are working today are going to be pushed aside because they’re too expensive or too picky in not going with the technology. Having said that, a lot of great cinematographers such as Dante Spinotti, he’s been shooting digitally, he loves it. Dean Semler, he shot APACOLYPTO digitally, he loved it. Maybe my fears are unwarranted but my fears are when you make the F stop not as important as it was, because the producers are always about trying to do things economically, do you then not hire the more experienced cameraman so the less experienced cameraman suddenly start doing all the work which is certainly good for them, but is it ultimately good for the medium? Maybe, maybe the new guys will bring fresher ideas but at some point I have to say the experienced cinematographers bring a lot to the party. We collaborate with the director on a lot of levels. I don’t know where it goes. Cinema a hundred and ten years ago started out as an escape. People went there to see something out of the ordinary and I just feel like we have to keep it that way, it’s gotta be something special. If people have a $15,000 version of a High Def camera and they’re shooting their home movies with the same state of technology that they’re shooting their features on, then people aren’t going to shell out the money to go to the theater because they can get the same quality in their homes with HD. CC: What advice would you give to any aspiring cinematographer? DP: My advice to cinematographer is to shoot as much as you possibly can. I went to film school, undergraduate school, and graduate school. I did everything I could when I was in college. I studied stage lighting in the drama department. I studied still photography in the journalism department. I studied Russian cinema in the Russian department. I studied screenplay writing in the English department. Everything I could was tailored back to what I became as a cinematographer. Everything I could possibly do led to that, so if you want to become a cinematographer, you’ve got to soak it up. You’ve got to look at paintings, look at magazines, look at the work that’s being done in commercials and print ads. You can’t get extreme when people try to knock off everything. Get yourself educated so you have a vocabulary and you’ve seen different and you’ve seen what you like but I certainly am not a person who advocates walking in and saying, "This shot should be like a shot from this film." I don’t advocate that at all but you have to have some visual education, maybe more about painting than anything else when you start to learn about composition and light. My best advice though is to shoot as much as you possibly can. Try things, be experimental with your lighting, but for God’s sake; shoot, shoot, shoot, shoot, shoot. That’s really the only way you can learn. You can stare at movies. You can listen to professors. You can read books all day long, but it’s not the same as doing it. Every opportunity that you can possibly get to shoot, seize that opportunity and make the best of it. CC: What is next for you? DP: ALIEN VS. PREDATOR: REQUIEM comes out on Christmas Day. I am pretty excited about that, I thank that could be pretty cool. The Brothers Strause are great guys, I love these guys and from what I’ve seen on the work print, it looks fucking amazing. That will be a big release. Another project THE KINGS OF APPLETON which I mentioned before is a teen movie that I was attracted to working with Bobby. He’s one of the nicest people I’ve ever met in my life. I’ll finish that up on the 29th of November than the 2nd of December I am off to South Africa to shoot a commercial for a pharmaceutical company. After that, it’s two weeks of scuba diving with my wife and daughter, and then most likely it will be FRIDAY THE 13TH. CC: I leave the last word to you. DP: It was a great time talking to you and good luck to you. CC: Thank you for your time. DP: My pleasure.
|
HOME
BLOGS
|
|||
