Are We Monsters? A chat with horror author Brian Kirk

Recently I had the pleasure of reading Brian Kirk’s debut horror novel, We Are Monsters, deservedly Stoker award nominated for superior achievement in a first novel. It’s a complex, fascinating work and I wanted to pick Brian’s brain…um, since that’s what he seems to excel at.

SRW: Welcome Brian! Tell the readers a little bit about We Are Monsters.

BK: Hey, Stuart! Thanks for taking the time to chat.

Certainly. We Are Monsters is a story about a brilliant, yet troubled psychiatrist named Alex Drexler who is working to create a cure for schizophrenia. At first, the drug he creates shows great promise in alleviating his patient’s symptoms. It appears to return schizophrenics to their former selves. But (as you may imagine) something goes wrong. Unforeseen side effects begin to emerge, forcing prior traumas to the surface, setting inner demons free. His medicine may help heal the schizophrenic mind, but it also expands it, and the monsters it releases could be more dangerous than the disease.

SRW: This is a very psychologically rich book, Brian. All of your characters are given back-stories, ultimately defining their current flaws, fears and guilt. The past makes us who we are. Very human traits. Do you have a background in psychology?

BK: I don’t have a formal background in psychology, though the field has always fascinated me. Like many creative people, I have been plagued with bouts of mental illness my whole life, which draws me to the subject. I’m fairly introspective and often psychoanalyze myself. Whether that’s good or bad, I don’t know, but over time I’ve become versed in the various methods of cognitive behavioral therapy for both self-application and out of general curiosity.

SRW: You’re not very nice to your three leads! (I like that. Heh.) Closet sadist or hyping up the drama and suspense?

BK: Probably the latter. What’s the point in writing about boring people without problems, right? As I’ve grown older, I’ve become fascinated with how events that occurred early in one’s life impact that person later on, either due to trauma rising to the surface, or through a sequence of events or decisions that lead someone on a certain path towards an undesirable destination they couldn’t foresee.

One of these two eventualities come true for most of the central characters in We Are Monsters. Their individual pasts have caught up with their current predicaments in ways that must be dealt with.

SRW: The three protagonists are all saddled with guilt, generated by events out of their control (for the most part; I’m looking at you, Alex, as the exception!). Did you write them to be pitied? Despised? Empathetic? I think you pulled all three emotions off at various times. But that guilt, Brian! One of the themes of the book appears to be that instilled guilt formulates who we as people are. Catholic much?

BK:  Very insightful, Stuart. Perhaps you are the closet psychologist!

I didn’t conceive the characters with the intention of eliciting a certain emotion, exactly. I was more concerned with giving them real issues to work through in a way that felt authentic to me. But, guilt? Yes. Hell, yes. I’ve lived with guilt stemming from a stringent religious upbringing most of my life. Many years spent worrying my soul was destined for eternal hell due to slight infractions to arbitrary rules that harmed no one. I think we all strive to become our actualized selves, either based on religious ideology or a basic moral code, and become disappointed when we fall short. That seems to be a fairly universal experience that I tried to express through the characters in the book. 

SRW: There’re quite a few themes in the book, some of them heavy. Now I don’t wanna’ make We Are Monsters sound like a dull college text-book, but generally in horror fiction, the reader doesn’t encounter such metaphysical themes as the nature of reality. Sort of literature gussied up with horror. Do you believe we are capable of forming our own reality? 

BK: I’m not sure what I believe. I’m equally compelled by arguments for free will as I am pre-determination. Personal experience leads me to believe we are capable of forming our own reality, but I don’t know if there’s “woo-woo” metaphysics involved or if it’s just a matter of applying basic momentum in a specific direction.  

Ten years ago, I was as far from being a published author as possible. But it’s something I knew I wanted to become. So I set my intention towards making it happen, applying my time and attention in that direction, taking all the necessary steps to accomplish that goal. Eventually I was able to turn that dream into my reality. Was there woo-woo involved as suggested by The Law of Attraction, and such philosophies, or was it simply a natural outcome based on the steps and actions I was taking? Don’t know. 

SRW:  There are some great quotes about insanity: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results.” (Often attributed to Einstein). I like this definition. But if we study it, Brian, aren’t your three protagonists guilty of insanity by this definition? Each day they use the same methods at work (particularly Eli), hoping to cure insanity and generally failing. If we really wanna’ get depressing, perhaps we’re all insane, performing the same work, day in or day out. 

BK: There is a broad spectrum of mental states. Our society tends to favor the analytical state of consciousness most grounded in the physical reality of things we can touch, measure, and weigh. That’s the state of consciousness rewarded in schools that rely on the memorization of information evaluated by multiple choice tests. People on other mental spectrums that lean more towards imaginary realms are often less valued by our society, and are even, depending on the degree of separation from our material reality and the actions that result from this, feared, ostracized, incarcerated and/or institutionalized.  

  

One thing that I find curious and frightening is to consider how our societal reward systems tend to favor people with psychopathic tendencies. Want to know the ten jobs with the highest rates of psychopathy?

1. CEO

2. Lawyer

3. Media (Television/Radio)

4. Salesperson

5. Surgeon

6. Journalist

7. Police officer

8. Clergy person

9. Chef

10. Civil servant

Yep, scary stuff.

SRW: Edgar Allen Poe wrote “I became insane with long intervals of horrible sanity.” Talk about depressing. If we accept this as the new world order, I don’t wanna be sane. How do you feel about this quote?

BK:  Ha! I like that! 

I think it’s all a matter of perspective. Bankers are crazy to circus performers, and visa versa. I wish our society was more open to altered states of consciousness, or valued states of consciousness that did more than earn money and drive our economy forward. One of the most common questions people ask when they learn I aspire to write professionally is, “How much does it pay?” 

I think the key is to be authentic to yourself. Don’t conform to the pressure of societal norms if they don’t make sense to you. It’s tricky, though. Because no one likes to starve.

SRW: The catalyst for the horrific events in the book is the drug, Dimethyltryptamine (that’s a handful to type!). As I read the book, I had assumed it a fictional drug. But, no, my pharmaceutical professor of a wife told me it’s a real deal. Well done! Did you do a lot of research before settling on the right drug to fit the tale? (I bet that was fun reading!) And do you believe in the power of Dimethl…Dimathap…that drug?

BK:  I first learned about Dimethyltryptamine, more commonly known as DMT, from a book called “DMT: The Spirit Molecule,” written by Rick Strassman, a scientist who conducted government funded clinical tests on the effects of DMT. I was fascinated by the results from that study. Otherwise sober, responsible volunteers who participated in this study were convinced they had entered alternate dimensions and communicated with alien intelligences during their experiences with DMT. These experiences were not only almost universally life altering for those who experienced them, there were similarities in experiences among disparate people who had never met. Almost like people from separate states sharing a common dream.

While the author does not make any definitive conclusions, he was compelled by this theory that the molecule opens a doorway in our minds that allows our consciousness to travel through to other dimensions. This is a theory long held by shamanic traditions, especially those who use the psychedelic brew, Ayahuasca, of which the chief psychedelic compound is DMT.

SRW: Finally—and I suppose we should have started here—the title. Clearly, the title references not only the mental patients, but the three protagonists, and humanity as a whole. Good, appropriate title. Did you have the title in mind before you began?

BK: No, the original title for the book was, “In Search of Asylum.” My editor at the time, Don D’Auria, felt like the title sounded too much like non-fiction, which I agreed with. He suggested, “Asylum,” which I felt was too generic, so I brainstormed alternates and came up with “We Are Monsters,” which felt right. I’m happy where we wound up. 

SRW: What’re you writing as a follow-up, Brian?

BK:  I’m currently working on a third novel, while my second is on submission with various editors. The completed novel currently making the rounds is the first in a planned trilogy of dark sci-fi thrillers with a “Strange Days” kind of vibe. The work-in-progress is a horror novel that I’m writing by the request of a publisher based on a proposal and should be done by year’s end. Hopefully one or more will hit!   

SRW: Tell everyone where they can find We Are Monsters.

BK: Anyone interested in checking out We Are Monsters can order a copy here:

 Amazon

Barnes and Noble 

And for anyone interested in striking up a virtual friendship, please connect with me through one of the following channels. Don’t worry. I only kill my characters.

 Brian Kirk

 Twitter

 Facebook

 Goodreads

SRW: Thanks for dropping by, Brian. And if you’re looking for a very interesting, well written and different horror novel, give We Are Monsters a shot.

BK: Thanks, Stuart! I appreciate the nice things you said about the novel and for taking the time to chat.

Return to Richard Griffin-ville! Put the kids outside and tuck the cat in...

Okay, I lied. That's what writers do. I said awesome filmaker Richard Griffin's interview would conclude last week. Sorry, Richard, but Oklahoma's weather trauma trumped you.

So two weeks ago, I yakked and yakked with fun and funny filmmaker Richard Griffin. Even I got tired. Hang on tight...here's the exciting, edge-of-the-seat, shocking conclusion to the epic interview! Bite on leather if you need to.

SRW: Richard, welcome back! 2008 was a busy year for you. You also released Beyond the Dunwich Horror. After Nun of That, I was surprised you took a stab at a pretty much straight-forward horror flick. Is this “Richard Griffin’s Gotta Pay the Rent” film?

RG: HA! There’s no such thing. Every film I make, I make from the heart. Thankfully, we have enough of a fan base that each film pays for the next movie, so there’s little to no risk. I have a ticket to ride, and the great thing is … I never have to make a movie just to have a success so I can make the films I want. I cannot imagine spending the long hours it takes to make movie if your heart isn’t in it. It doesn’t make sense at all. 

SRW: Again I noticed a great deal of thought and care was put into the credit sequence, this time evoking a ‘70’s made-for-TV movie sorta vibe. For you, Richard, the movie seems strangely subdued.  There’re nods to Lovecraft, of course, but am I right in detecting a Mario Bava/Argento influence as well? Particularly with some of the color schemes?

RG: Yeah, there’s a big Argento / Fulci / Bava thing going on. But I also wanted to amp up the sexuality, because that’s really missing from not only Lovecraft adaptations, but also from indie films in general. I really love Beyond the Dunwich Horror, because not only is it this huge love letter to Italian horror, but to horror films in general. 

SRW: Atomic Brain Invasion landed in 2010. More so than Creature from the Hillbilly Lagoon, this is a note-by-note, nearly perfect recreation of a ‘50’s schlock fest (minus some post-modern satire and humor, natch). The opening black and white bit (a spoof on educational propaganda films) was some scientific blowhard going on and on about alien fishmen was fantastic. I was kinda hoping the whole film would be in B&W. Did you consider going that route?

RG: Yes. But for reasons I’d rather not get into, we decided to go the Technicolor Route.

SRW: The usual Richard Griffin bad guys are in full force: the Catholic League of Decency, the government, the military. But, to me, the biggest threat was the actor who played the coonskin cap wearing nerd. I’m just sayin’. Whenever he panics, he raises his voice, stuttering like “Shaggy” from “Scooby-Do.” (“A g-g-g-ghost!”) What’s up with THAT?

RG: It’s funny. We always make with the funny. 

SRW: Um, moving on...Also terrific was the movie scene within the movie. Two guys standing around, one of them oblivious as to where the other man is pointing out a monster. Eventually they start sniping at one another for being rude. That’s the movie I want to see! Oh, and Elvis shows up here. Brandon Luis Aponte (also very good in Nun of That) makes for an amusing Elvis. Where do you find your actors? How do you convince them to do some of the things your scripts require?

RG: Typically they need no convincing. They see the humor in the script, and realize quickly it’s all in good fun. I think the main thing is, our films aren’t mean spirited. They’re so good natured, it’s hard to think they’re anything but playful by their very nature. 

SRW:  The following year brought you back to what I presume to be an obsession of yours: the disco and the ‘70’s. I’m talking The Disco Exorcist, of course. The film almost plays like a comical version of Boogie Nights (even a “roller girl” shows up). With, you know, demons. The “hero’s” a typical ‘70’s cad, irresistible to women and not too safe in his sexual endeavors. Was this movie just an excuse to play in the ‘70’s?

RG: The reason for the film is the title. It just popped into my head one day. “Michael Reed IS The Disco Exorcist”. I just walked around my house laughing my head off. The plot came to me about five minutes after the title. On a car ride to Rock and Shock, I pitched the idea to my screenwriter friend Tony Nunes, and he knocked out the first draft pretty quickly. 

You know, the thing I love the most about this movie is that it’s really sexy. That was my goal. What if you made a softcore porno film that had a witty screenplay and good acting? That’s really what making The Disco Exorcist was all about.

SRW: Okay, cool. Now I wanna rewatch. You scratched up the film stock, giving the movie a good old crappy VHS vibe. How was that done?

RG: It was done with overlays of real damaged film. None of it was done with CGI. I think it gives it a higher quality that most films that try that look. 

 

SRW: There are a lot of highlights (and blue eye shadow!). But my favorite had to be the hilariously uncomfortable family dinner scene. Autobiographical?

RG: No, my family is pretty functional. I just love awkward dinner table scenes in movies, so I tend to have a lot of them in my movies. I love humor that’s based around discomfort and embarrassment, so that seems like the perfect place for it to happen! 

SRW: My fave type of humor, too! Michael Thurber appears to be one of your favorite actors. Is his character patterned after Anton LaVey?

RG: Nope. He was patterned after Sardu, the MC of the Joel Reed film Bloodsucking Freaks! 

SRW: Thought I was the only one to see that awful, yet great, movie! Your next film, Exhumed, is shot in gorgeous black and white, giving it an unworldly appearance. Which, I think, fits the film nicely. While there’s some dark humor, it’s not your typical confrontational style. Did you set out to make a more serious film? Or did the nature of the script call for it?

RG: Guy Benoit’s screenplay for Exhumed is still one of the finest scripts I’ve ever had the pleasure of reading and directing. It’s so haunting, and tragically sad. There really wasn’t a place for any outward humor in the movie.

SRW: It’s probably your most gothic film with a wide set of references. Let me see if I can spot them all: the mannequin sequence could be a shout-out to either Mario Bava’s Blood and Black Lace. Or is it Maniac? I got a Whatever Happened to Baby Jane gothic vibe on occasion.  And at times is played like a Kuchar melodrama. How’d I do?

RG: Wrong on all counts, but close on one. The mannequins were a slight homage to Mario Bava’s Lisa and the Devil. 

SRW: I won’t spoil the ending. But I have to say it was one of the sickest, most disturbing and psychotic, yet oddly touching finales to all of your films. Well done!

RG: Thank you! 

SRW: Next we go back in time to 1983 in Murder University. All of the slasher tropes are in place: promiscuous college students getting slaughtered, a haunted house, beheadings, masked ax killers, a new wave theme song. And that’s just in the opening two minutes! Your films are all over the place time-wise. Do you like revisiting the past? Or do you think the exploitation films of the ‘50’s through the ‘80’s were just more fun?

RG: I like making period pieces! I don’t really think of them as homages as much as I love to play around with costumes and sets. It’s just kind of dull making a modern day horror film with a bunch of twits running around with their cell phones in bland locations. The fashions of the 70s and 80s were a lot cooler, and it gives me more visually interesting things to point my camera at.

SRW: Another recurring actor is Jamie DuFault, who’s quite good as the hero, making him one of your most appealing leads. The similarly named Jesse DuFault is in several of your films as well. Brother thespians? (And Michael Thurber is quite funny as a super foul-mouthed detective.)

RG: Yes! They’re brothers. Jamie is the eldest of the two. Both are extremely different as thespians, but they’re both wonderful in their own way. Extremely professional and good natured.

SRW: I was quite looking forward to your next film, Frankenstein’s Hungry Dead, as I thought the subject matter would’ve been right up your twisted alley. To be honest, it didn’t feel like a Richard Griffin film. There’s humor, but not of the subversive type. It almost seemed more traditional, far more subdued. I noticed Ted Marr didn’t have a hand in production on this film (Just sayin’). Did someone hire you to take on this project?

RG: Nope. This was a project I did to just have some fun. I wanted to go back and make a movie like I did when I was a teenager making Super 8 films with friends. To be honest, it’s probably my favorite of my movies. It’s got a lot of energy, and it was a blast to make. How can you not have fun making movies in an actual wax museum? 

SRW: Was the head in the tray a nod to The Brain that Wouldn’t Die?

RG: Sure was! 

SRW: The Sins of Dracula found you back in your comfort zone: amusingly taking on religion and organized groups. There’s an opening disclaimer/warning that advises the viewer to watch responsibly and consult your local parish. Your hero, Billy (Jamie DuFault again; quite good), runs up against (gasp) the Evils of community theatre. We’re talking drug users! Odd dressers! Dungeons and Dragons gamers! And gays! Richard, do you see community theatre as the logical anti-religious organization?

RG: No. I just thought it was a strange place for Dracula to be hanging out. I just started watching a bunch of Christian scare films from the 70s and 80s, and I thought they were ripe for satire. I thought, “What if a church wanted to make their own scare film? What if they were so un-hip they thought kids were still scared by Dracula?” I contacted writer Michael Varrati and we were off and running! 

SRW: I love those Christian propaganda films. For all the wrong reasons, of course. Billy’s monologue to God was hilarious. How much was improvised or scripted?

RG: Entirely scripted by Michael Varrati. Some of the finest writing of the film. It wasn’t originally in the screenplay, but added later. I think it’s hysterically funny, and Jamie Default completely knocks it out of the park.

SRW: Yes, he did. And congrats to Varrati, a great writer. One of my favorite lines in all your movies: “I had sex with Shannon and now everyone’s dead!” I suppose you have to see it to understand it in context. Hey, too bad we didn’t get to see any of “Jonestown Jubilee.” One can hold out hope.

RG: Originally in the script there was about five more pages dealing with Jonestown Jubilee, but it suddenly became entirely about that and we just completely forgot about Dracula. Maybe someday Michael Varrati will write a Broadway musical about it.

SRW: Dreams stay alive! Seven Dorms of Death is a riot from start to finish. You play up the “lost movie” angle quite well. You stuff the film full of terribly ripe dialogue, arch acting, one of the worst screams ever, terrible effects, missing scenes, stock footage, the whole ball of awful wax. Is it hard to be intentionally terrible?

RG: Well, the big challenge was to work with each actor to find out what kind of bad actor they would be. Would they be wooden? Or would they overdo everything? It was completely liberating, because you could just make horrible mistakes and they would be perfect for the film. In terms of just being on the set, it was a sheer joy to make. We blew so many takes because myself or the crew would just crack up laughing. The cast is brilliant.

SRW: I didn’t recognize Michael Thurber as Baron Von Blah at first, here channeling Joe Flaherty and many old-school horror hosts.  Quite a fun wrap-around. Even better are the ads and trailers. Did you have a bunch of left-over ideas with nowhere to put them?

RG: No, those were all original ideas for the movie. Some were written by Matthew Jason Walsh, who wrote the screenplay for Seven Dorms, some by Michael Varrati, and some by myself. Those were a lot of fun to write and shoot. 

SRW: Okay, I’m not going to even ask about Aaron Andrade’s grating performance as Detective Vargas. Forget it, I am going to ask. Did you direct him in this anger-management deprived performance?

RG: That’s all Aaron, and my favorite performance in any of my films, hands down. Sheer genius. It takes 50 pound brass balls to give that kind of performance, but Aaron is fearless. 

SRW: The final film! Flesh for the Inferno. Not much to say ‘cause I’m running out of Griffin gas. But you’re still working out your anti-religious stance (particularly Catholicism). Cheaper than therapy?

RG: I’m not even a Christian! That’s all Michael Varrati, who wrote the script. To me, it’s a just  good, simple horror story. I really have no bones to pick with the Catholic Church, except when it comes to covering up child rape, which they seem to do with wild abandon. But, that being said… I’ve been friends with several priests and nuns in my life, and they were wonderful, generous persons. After all, it’s only a movie. 

SRW: (Yeah, I've kinda got a problem with that child abuse stuff, too). There you have it, folks. Richard’s quite the prolific filmmaker. There’re still three or four I haven’t watched. His films aren’t for everybody. But if you’ve ever loved cheesy horror flicks from the good ol’ days of VHS and drive-ins, and have an anarchistic streak of humor in you, then seek them out. Thanks much, Richard.

Website: http://scorpiofilmreleasing.squarespace.com/

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SCORPIOFILMRELEASING?fref=ts

Twitter: https://twitter.com/ScorpioFilm

Oooooklahoma, where the winds comes sweepin'...SHUT UP!

Well, I imagine there aren't too many Okies singing that beloved song now.

(Due to bad weather, filmmaker Richard Griffin's jaw-dropping interview will conclude next week.)
 
Not long ago, a devastating, incredible wind storm blew through eastern Oklahoma. Some of you, not from the Midwest, might be scoffing, saying, "Oh my, Stuart, what's wrong? Afraid your hair will muss?"

A) I don't have any hair; B) people underestimate the power of wind.

How strong was it? It blew over a semi on the Turner Turnpike. Over 87,000 people were without power. One of the water suppliers lost some of their pumps, putting their customers on rations. A mobile home with a dog inside it was flattened (miraculously, the dog's okay). Finally, everywhere you look, trees are down, houses destroyed, people's lives in turmoil. And the local tree trimmer guys are set for life. The remnants of a war-torn battle zone.

Sadly, my inlaws were affected. The storm plowed through Broken Arrow, next to Tulsa, in Nature's indiscriminate and bullying way. (All photos are from their yard).

They live on a vastly wooded three acres and over half of their trees are down, some having fallen on the house. Karma smiled on them, though. Miraculously, the house is undamaged. My mother-in-law was out when the storm blew through but my father-in-law was at home. Apparently, he'd had no idea it'd happened. Maybe he had his TV headphones on. I'm sure when he went outside, though, he was in for a shock. Anyway...maybe it's good karma paying them back for the nice things they do. But the clean-up, ay-yi-yi!

My wife packed up her loppers and headed down. Her brother brought the chainsaw, his wife supplied tea and lemonade making skills. Unfortunately, I couldn't go because I wasn't supposed to make long car trips. Recovering from "Major Surgery," don't you know. (Whew. Dodged that bullet).

But the clean-up crew could only do so much. One of the downed trees was thicker than a giant's thumb. No chainsaws could even begin to bite the bark. 

My inlaws had an estimate. Crikey. I need to get into that line of work. Sadly, the guy says he'll have to cut down another tree to get his truck into the backyard. Headache after heartache for them.

Still, the house is intact. So is their health. Unlike many other Oklahomans.

Never underestimate the power of wind. You can't do anything about it, I'm just sayin'. And, people, for the love of God, stop singing that happy song about Oklahoma wind!

Richard Griffin: Absolute Filmmaking Threat to Common Decency!

Recently I had the pleasure of stumbling onto the films of independent filmmaker Richard Griffin. A true maverick with a style distinctly his own, his films need to be seen to be believed. Imagine if John Waters directed horror flicks and you’re almost there. Almost. Richard has graciously accepted my request to be tossed on the grill of my blog. So welcome to the subversive, insane, blasphemous, demented, delirious, gory, yet undeniably funny universe(s) of Richard Griffin!

SRW: Thanks for taking time out, Richard. Let’s start at the beginning. After Titus Andronicus (and I tried to watch it, I did! So…I didn’t.), your first film was Feeding the Masses from 2004. You were off to a good start with this zombie tale. Yet you were already developing your trademark satirical chops with the advertising, government propaganda films and newscast bits.  Does the satire come naturally? Did you begin making films thinking “I’m gonna make some comedies?”

RG: Well, I find humor in just about everything. No matter how horrible the situation is, there’s humor. I think some of this might also be a reaction to what was happening with horror at the time. The really grim, gritty SAW type horror films. I just really couldn’t get into them, ya know? I was much more of a Vincent Price / Roger Corman fan. I like my horror to have a sense of fun.

SRW: Good on you, mate! Me, too.  The movie owes a debt to George Romero’s classic Dawn of the Dead, particularly the opening news station sequence. Are you a Romero fan?

RG: His early stuff, yeah. Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead and especially Martin. I learned to edit by watching and studying his early films. 

SRW: (I know, right? What happened to his later films?) Even though there are laughs in the film, you still take time out for character development. I think that’s important, probably even more so in comedies. The hero’s monologue where he opens up about his fear of death is particularly well done.

RG: Yeah, that’s a chilling moment. That’s was what sold me on Trent Haaga’s screenplay. That entire moment is so well written, and Billy Garberina did a masterful job delivering it.

SRW: Another Richard Griffin theme is established early: distrust of government. Richard, are you on any watch-lists we should know about?

RG: Ha! No. I think I have a healthy distrust,  but I’m not cynical. I think all of this can actually work out. I’m a cranky optimist. 

SRW: Raving Maniacs from 2005 was your next film. Again a zombie flick, but this one is more daring, venturing into extremely gory terrain and possibly off-putting subject matter (zombie incest anyone?). Truth time, Richard, do you derive pleasure in disturbing viewers?

RG: Nah, I think at this point we as artists cannot shock anyone with anything. I just put stuff in my movies to amuse me. If you as an audience member enjoys it, great. If not, great. I make films for myself first, and everyone else second. 

SRW: Maniacs plays as a portrait of the hedonistic lifestyle of drug-culture youth with “zombiefication” a metaphor for the disastrous result of drug addiction. Or am I reading wayyy too much into your horror film?

RG: If there is a “message” to Raving Maniacs, it was more about the legal drugs that people are consuming like candy these days. There’s a scene early on in the film where our protagonists are driving to the rave, and each one is describing what type of anti-depressant they’re currently taking. 

SRW: Where’d the chapter titles come from? They begin as a sort of economics lesson (regarding the drug dealers), then segue into a sort of AAA manifesto (for the victims/users).

RG: That was co-writer Trent Haaga’s idea! I thought it was very clever, so I kept it in the movie.

SRW: Your films are always GLBT friendly (it’s no secret you’re openly gay), yet no group is safe from your satirical arrows. Do you think it’s important for the gay community to be represented in your films? I only ask because Hollywood is “trying” to be more openly representative (yet still failing with some awful characterization), yet I don’t recall seeing too many gay characters in lower budgeted films.

RG: Well, yeah. I’ve been criticized in some circles for how I portray gay characters. There was a period during the 90s if you didn’t make your gay characters basically perfect in every way, then you were somehow a threat to the movement. And recently I directed a short film titled CRASH SITE, that really had people up in arms with how gays were portrayed. I honestly don’t get it, but then again I’ve always been able to laugh at myself, and sometimes it’s easy to see some folks can’t. I always try to have my gay characters not be either complete scumbags or saint-like heroes, but you can’t please everyone. 

SRW: You go, Richard. In 2005, you unleashed Creature from the Hillbilly Lagoon. What can I say about this flick? As it turns out, not much for a change. It is what it is and it is a funny, fun throw-back to the drive-in schlock of the ‘50’s (albeit with modern gore and grotesque characters). Defend yourself!

RG: I love that cracked out flick! It’s just pure bubblegum fun. It’s a real EC comics type film, and if you put your brain under your seat for 85 minutes, you’ll love the ride! 

SRW: I liked the cool comic book styled opening credits. In fact, Richard, most of your films have stylish credit sequences, usually played over some good rockabilly. Who’s responsible for the credits?

RG: Typically myself, but on occasion I hand them over to someone like my CGI guru John Dusek. 

SRW: It was nice you put the creature (as goofy as it was) up front from the beginning. Most movies of this ilk keep “the money shot” in hiding until the end of the film. Directorial or script decision?

RG: It was a great looking creature, and the bulk of our

 budget went towards it! So if you got it, flaunt it! 

SRW: There’s a lot of Redneck Anger(!) in the film. I’m gonna add rednecks alongside the government on your enemy list, Richard. We’ll see how the rest of the films tally up.

RG: No, I love redneck humor. Seriously, I have a soft spot in my heart for what my producer calls “Hee-Haw Humor”. 

SRW: I suppose now’s a good as time as any to mention your long-time producing (sometimes writing) partner Ted Marr. Tell us about Ted.

RG: He’s my husband, and very much the Yin to my Yang. He’s extremely creative, hyper intelligent, and just an all around awesome person. We love working together, and we’ve had a great time, especially on the movies we co-wrote together like NUN OF THAT and SPLATTER DISCO.

SRW: Oh, before we move on…did the budget run out on Hillbilly, hence the economical comic book panel car crash?

RG: Well, let’s just say the budget didn’t “run out”. More that there wasn’t really a budget. To make matters worse, we had to fire three of the lead actors two days into shooting, so the reshoots of their scenes ate up what tiny bit of budget we might have allocated to shoot a car crash! 

SRW: You followed up with Pretty Dead Things in 2006. This time it’s your take on vampire flicks. Do you plan on covering the entire supernatural gamut of creatures eventually? Furthermore, do you intend on sticking to horror comedies?

RG: I’ve completely left the horror genre. Recently I’ve been directing sci-fi (Future Justice), romantic comedies, and d!action films. I figured I had a good run in the horror genre, and now I really want to branch out. 

SRW: Noooo! You're so fun at the horror/comedy genre, Richard! But I kinda get it. Horror tends to burn "artists" out and no one seems to really care about my horror novels. Dead Things begins on a surreal, almost “Lynchian (sorry, I used that term, but it’s easily identifiable even if it is lazy writing)” note. Something’s creepy about the hotel. And the clerk’s a quirky hoot. I imagine you pay attention to a lot of the everyday weirdness around you. Safe to say?

RG: I think if you’re a director, you have to pay attention to the world around you. And yeah, the world is a weird place, especially if you’re willing to look at it a certain way. I have a certain outlook on the world I like to try to put into all my movies, and I hope it’s always rather positive. 

SRW: So, we have an evil pizza boy, porn star vampires, hypocritical religious and political leaders, homophobes and a vampire who gets beheaded (yet still finishes the film)! How much of this is made up on the fly and how much is scripted? Is that the typical way you work?

RG: That film, like all my other films, was extremely tightly scripted. We do not improv. 

SRW: Wow. Kinda surprises me, since the films are so funny. Splatter Disco from 2007 came next. At first I thought the film was going for a cool ‘70’s/’80’s slasher vibe. Than I was shocked when I realized it was a musical! (Granted I won’t be, um, buying the soundtrack or anything, but I did enjoy the “Let’s Do It” number. Oh! And the rockabilly band was smoking!). Was this intended to be a musical from the beginning?

RG: Yep! And that’s why I never thought POP Cinema would give us the money to make the film! I sent them the script, and I thought to myself, “Well, I’ll have the Winter off from filmmaking, because they’ll never say yes to this.”, and lo and behold… they loved it to the point where they gave us more money to hire name actors! Miracles will never cease! 

SRW: Readers, you haven’t lived until you’ve seen a musical “Furry” number. Drawn from experience, Richard? Or did you want to expose the seedy, furry underbelly of the Furry subculture? 

RG:  When Ted and I were writing the screenplay, I did a Google search for “Harmless Kinks”. And furries came up. I had zero idea what the hell that was about. So much so, in fact, that I was criticized by some members of the Furry Community because in Splatter Disco they’re actually what are called Plushies! Ah, well! 

SRW: LOL! I, too, wrote about the "Furry" sub-culture." The great Ken Foree (horror fans know him) puts in a welcome appearance, lending some gravitas to the proceedings. He even has a semi-touching (for a Griffin joint) scene with his son. Was the part written with him in mind?

RG: Not in the slightest. When POP Cinema read the screenplay, they really dug it so they raised the budget high enough for me to hire some name actors. One of the name actors they suggested was Ken, and I didn’t think in a million years we’d be able to hire him.

SRW: Another Griffin movie, another angry mob rallying against what they consider indecent. (I get enough of that in real life living in Kansas). This time the mob sets their sights on a “decadent” and kinky disco. What would Richard Griffin rally against?

RG: Stupidity and the continued infantilization of our culture.

SRW: Necroville was co-directed with Billy Garberina. How did that come about? And how do two directors work alongside one another? Will you be doing it again?

RG: Originally I was supposed to only be the director of photography and camera operator on Necroville, and Billy was starring, directing and producing. After three or four days of the 18 day shoot, he got really run down. I asked if he would like me to lend a hand in the directing duties, and he said yes. The entire experience of making that movie was just a sheer joy. The hours were long, the heat was pretty intense at moments, but overall it was one of the highlights of my career. Being a New England native, just being able to spend time out in the New Mexico desert was a real wonder for the senses. 

As for if I’ll ever co-direct another movie, I haven’t given it much thought in the 10 years since Necroville, but if a project comes up that I think would be fun to collaborate with someone, I’d be willing to give it another shot. 

SRW: Necroville is a return to zombies with a pretty fresh take, I think. Zombies are seen almost as a nuisance to be dealt with; no fear from the humans, no panicking. I suppose after awhile that would be the next logical step in a zombie apocalypse. Do you really see humanity capable of accepting zombies as a nuisance akin to dog droppings on the sidewalk? 

RG: One of the best, and also worst, abilities of human beings is our strength at adapting to any situation. It’s great in some respects, because we don’t easily crumble under adversity, but it also means we tend to ignore problems as well. 

SRW: Our slacker heroes are hired by “Zom-B-Gone,” a funny concept, where they become zombie exterminators (who also deal with loud college parties). A slacker workplace comedy, it’s sort of like Office Space. Only with zombies. And cheaper and gorier. Do you come up with a single idea/concept first? Or several scenes to wrap a story around?

RG: I had nothing to do with the screenplay. That was written by Billy and Adam Jarmon Brown. It was already in place when I was signed on to DP the movie. I thought it was delightful, and was amazed at how much Billy was able to pull off with the small budget he had to work with. If the script said there would be 100 zombies attacking a van, then on the day of the shoot there was 100 zombies attacking a van! Amazing! 

SRW: The hero’s girlfriend is an awful, high-maintenance terror, the true villain of the film. Did you set out to make her the most heinous character in your filmography?

RG: Once again, that was all Billy’s doing. He had a fantastic actor in that role, and they had the perfect chemistry. 

SRW: There’re many memorable sequences: the Girl Scout troop vying for a merit badge, vampire death by holy water urination, big co-worker Paul sawing through a zombie horde (on his day off to boot!). But I really liked the entire piano dropping onto a vampire sequence. While a salute to cartoons, it’s also filmed almost like a silent movie sequence. Intentional? Or have I got too much spare time?

RG: I’m a HUGE fan of Warner Brother’s cartoons, especially those directed by Chuck Jones, so there’s always that element in everything I do. Plus, I think movies should be visual. The less dialogue the better.

SRW: I love Chuck Jones, too. Up next you tackle the seedy Grindhouse, revenge, exploitation subgenre with Nun of That, which I believe is your most accomplished film to date. Wonderfully, subversively funny. The acting’s better, the fight scenes more realistic, everything really comes together on this film. Is this due to on-the-job training? Or did you have a larger budget to play with?

RG: It was a screenplay everyone was passionate about. It wasn’t just another job. The concept I came up with of this secret organization of crime-fighting nuns really sparked a lot of people’s imaginations, and with the help of my co-writer Ted Marr, we were able to craft a script that people really wanted to work on, and give 110 percent. That entire production was blessed. I had a very long shooting schedule, so I could craft scenes exactly like I wanted them, and the cast was very talented and fearless. 

SRW: I racked my (admittedly small) brain trying to figure out when the flick’s supposed to take place. On one hand, you have the big lapelled, big facial-haired goon mobsters straight out of the early ‘70’s; then later, an 80’s-styled mohawked punk shows up. Some of the characters look current. Help! When? Or does it really matter?

RG: It’s in it’s own universe. Best not to get hung up on details. But I will say that punk rockers are more of a 70s thing than an 80s thing. So, if I HAD to give an answer, the movie takes place around 1978. 

SRW: The opening sequence contains one of the most indelible images from all of your films: a fully dressed nun swinging on a stripper pole, spraying machine gun bullets and lobbing grenades at evil mobsters in the audience. Sublime. Did the entire flick spring from this image?

RG: Nope! The entire movie sprung from the idea of a kick-ass nun. And the thing is, we were offered a rather large budget to make the movie from a production company, but they wanted it played straight. I turned them down because, how the hell do you make a movie about a crime-fighting nun and NOT make it funny? The very idea is so insane, so off-the-wall, the only way to make it work is through satire. 

SRW: Great call. Jesus’ hilarious song and dance routine is a riot (much better than anything in Splatter Disco). Do you ever meet viewers whose noses get tweaked by your flicks? Or does that audience pretty much just stay away?

RG: The thing is… about NUN OF THAT… we thought it was going to offend religious folks, especially Catholics, but at the end of the day .. they loved it! Especially the older Catholics who remember things before Vatican II. You know, all the “Can’t eat meat on Friday” jokes! Listen, here’s the truth… I believe in God with all my heart. And when Ted and I wrote the screenplay my main thing was that God was off limits when it came to the humor. My goal wasn’t to offend with the movie, but to make people laugh. And, thankfully, that seemed to be the case. As satirical as my movies are, they’re not mean spirited. It’s all done with a good sense of fun. 

SRW: I agree and good on you, Richard. I have many favorite sequences in this flick, but I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the uproarious nun bar called “Bar Nun.” Here, nuns are breaking bottles, hunkering down in fights, pretty much nuns gone wild. Greatness on a budget. Did you have any actresses developing cold feet for portraying a nun in this manner (you know, watching the sky for lightning bolts and stuff)?

RG: Everyone involved with the movie attacked their roles 100 percent. Nobody was shy about the stuff. As I said before, the idea was so original for the movie… that all the talent were completely game. It was a magical time making that movie.

SRW: Finally…by this time, I’m recognizing quite a few of your stable of recurring actors (some better than others; no names mentioned). But…why is the mobster momma portrayed by a guy in drag?

RG: I had worked with Rich Tretheway on another movie, and I was absolutely amazed at how talented he is. When it came time to cast Mamma Rizzo, he was just the perfect choice. And the great thing about Rich is, he didn’t play the role as a man in a dress. He didn’t play it as a goof. He played her like she was a real woman. It was rather astonishing to watch. When you’ve made as many movies as I have, you find yourself wanting to take major risks, and this one paid off in spades. 

SRW: Okay...time to go to bed. I'm long-winded. So is Richard. Tune in next week for the stunning, shocking, mind-blowing conclusion to the interview! Same bat-time, same bat channel...