Here is a neat interview with Mick Garris for the 5th edition of the Strasbourg European Fantastic Film Festival.
Garris points out that he's written five books. This means that he is deeply moved my the words -- the language itself. "Story telling is story telling," Garris says. Sometimes there are different formats for the story -- but at the heart is good writing. The interview really focuses on writing and story telling.
Garris directed Psycho 4, and there is some discussion about Psycho and Hitchcock.
When asked why we feel some empathy for the bad guys, the killers, in Garris' work, he points out that humans are complex. "One of the things that is so great about Stephen King is how human his characters are. That has always drawn me to what he does, and why we work together so much. Complexity in the human character is what story telling is all about. Not just what they do, but why they do it."
About Bag of Bones, Garris says that he loved it from the beginning. It was originally bought by Bruce Willis. It was supposed to be a movie, but because it was not a horror movie for teens it was hard to find a "home" for the work.
Garris lists as some of his influences as Ray Bradbury, Richard Matheson and Stephen King.
One of the most interesting comments about evil in fiction is his observation that villains don't know they're villains, or rather that they may see themselves heroic in their actions.
ReplyDeleteThe irony is it jibes with what an analyst wrote once in his dealings with curing psychosis.
It's an insight I think both Shakespeare and King share, and I think the comparison between the two writers is justified.
ChrisC
Some other things of note. My first exposure to The Shining was, believe it or not, the Kubrick movie.
DeleteAt first, this was all I had to go on until I heard of King and found out about his book.
From there, my opinions began a gradual shift which I never bothered to notice until just yesterday. I started out thinking that Kubrick's film was good, but then after reading the novel, the movie turned cold and clinical, and not very entertaining.
Garris says the Kubrick movie grew on him over time yet it seems the opposite with me. Every time I go back it just seems more empty, although to be fair, I believe King expert Dr. Michael Colling's when he makes a point about Kubrick making his own version of adaptations.
Collings says: "The best approach to Kubrick’s The Shining is to divorce it from any connections with Stephen King—not because Kubrick failed to do justice to King’s narrative, but simply because it has ceased to be King’s".
The Collings link can be found here:
http://www.starshineandshadows.com/essays/2007-05-30.html
ChrisC