The Bunker is a movie about a kidnapped congressman's daughter and the hell she goes through. I only saw the preview and during those 2 minutes I was sitting on the edge of my seat. I got a chance to interview its amazing director, Joe Monks about this unique movie that will be coming to festivals and a Netflix near you.

Horror News Network: What made you want to be a film director?

Joe Monks: I’d always wanted to get into film eventually, but I hadn’t really thought much about pursuing it after losing my eyesight in 2002. After one of my short stories was optioned (“Chance Meeting”, from the horror anthology Stuff Outa My Head), I got the chance to write the screenplay, which was produced for a TV pilot. Even though the pilot wasn’t picked up, that’s what really started me leaning back toward moving into film. The movie audience is so much larger than the comic book audience, that once you get involved, you’re kind of drawn into it because it opens up your work to so many more people.

Horror News Network: What are some of your favorite Horror Films?

Joe Monks: Like most horror guys, I’ve got The Exorcist and JAWS way up there. But I also really love the 1954 sci-fi/horror film THEM! Yeah, I know. Giant ants. But the film has some genuinely creepy moments, and it’s one of those films I saw when I was really young, so it was still able to have an impact on me. I also like the first SCANNERS a lot, and think Carpenter’s The Thing is, by far, his best work. I’d probably love Psycho even more if I’d been able to see it before the ending had become a sit-com gag, and I’d encountered so many spoofs of it. I still love it, but unlike THEM! which I caught when I was around 9 and knew nothing about it, I already knew the whole Psycho story, so it didn’t wow me the way it would have had I seen it earlier.

Horror News Network: If you were not a film director, what would you have been?

Joe Monks: What I still am, to one degree or another—which is a writer. I’ve been writing since I was 9, and I’ve never stopped. From short stories to a novel I completed recently to screenplays, I plan to keep writing, no matter how the directing thing goes. Writing is a passion, I don’t think there’s any better way to put it. Some folks are passionate about golf, or hiking, or building model railroads, to the point they’re obsessed with it. Right now, every writer reading this is nodding his/her head, because they know exactly what I’m talking about. Writing’s like a disease. Once you’re infected, it’s a lifelong condition.

Horror News Network: Who have been some of your biggest influences?

Joe Monks: I can’t really point to people in particular, because so many creators have been influential for one reason or another. There aren’t writers or filmmakers I can point to and say, “That’s really the guy whose work I patterned mine after,” because from a lot of different creators, I’ve found little things that I liked enough to make part of my creative toolbox. I grew up reading King, like a lot of wannabe writers. But what I’ve always considered the best tool in his arsenal is how he can ground readers in the common, the everyday. He can describe the quickie mart and the guy who runs it and engage you like you’ve been living in that small town all your life, using the familiar to make you comfy, before opening up the can of worms and all hell breaking loose. That ability to juxtapose the ordinary with the fantastic once he’s drawn you in, and to do it so effortlessly, was influential. The way certain writers and filmmakers kill off protagonists, like Spielberg with Quint or Gordon Douglas sacrificing James Whitmore’s character in THEM! When you’re young, and you see main characters getting offed, it really grips you, because you expect those characters to make it through, to survive and be victorious in the end. But when you see characters that have been portrayed as all-but invincible going down or being sacrificed for whatever greater good awaits, that tends to make an impression. I think it’s little things like that that have influenced my work and how I approach what I do—be it a piece of fiction or directing a scene—and there’re just too many folks who’ve contributed along the way to single ‘em all out...or even a few.

Horror News Network: Where did you come up with the idea for The Bunker?

Joe Monks: The Bunker was originally going to be a short story. I had this idea for a kidnap story revolving around a congressman’s daughter, sort of a wild-child in the politically embarrassing Roger Clinton/Billy Carter mode, who runs away and finds herself in a world of trouble. I must have tried a dozen times or so to write it, but it just didn’t work for one reason or another. Eventually, I tried scripting it out as a comic book, and it didn’t fare any better in that medium, either. Until I got the gig writing the screenplay for Chance Meeting, it hadn’t occurred to me to try and turn it into something for the screen. Hell, I never even had a title until I sat down one night and started banging away at the keyboard. A couple of days later, I  was sitting there, editing the finished script, and as a working title I typed in THE BUNKER. That’s how it goes sometimes. Once I did start rolling on it, though, it morphed into something bigger, the way a short story sometimes develops into a novella. But the basic spark came from the concept of a kid who’s just gotten sick and tired of living under the microscope as the teenage daughter of a public figure in New York City politics, who rebels in a very self-destructive way.

I should probably clarify something that I think a lot of folks have been confused about concerning the movie. The Bunker is a stand-alone feature. I wrote it without a framing sequence/wraparound. That came about later given that I had written the first Flowers on the Razorwire screenplay and a similar sequence was added—sort of a Tales From the Crypt type thing—onto that short, as well. But when Terry West first got the script? There was only The Bunker, no wraparound, no Flowers on the Razorwire component, nothing like that at all. That was only added later. As it stands now, The Bunker clocks in at around 75 minutes, which is very short for a feature, but qualifies for festivals and such. So, I’ve rewritten some things and will be shooting some additional footage to round out the film. I think that with some of the misinformation out there—and there’s been an awful lot of claims made about The Bunker—the thing I’d like to make clear to people is that The Bunker is not a Flowers on the Razorwire project. It wasn’t shot to be one, either. Anyone who goes back and looks at early press releases and blog entries about it can plainly see, The Bunker was meant to be its own stand-alone project. For a time, I did plan to allow it to be used with the wraparound for the American Horrors TV series, but that didn’t pan out. So, people need to be able to separate the two. The Bunker is The Bunker, that’s it. Adding a wraparound to use it for another purpose doesn’t change the fact that The Bunker is my property, from story to screenplay to shoot to final edit. Sight Unseen Pictures, LLC produced it, but the intellectual property and copyright is 100% mine. My work doesn’t suddenly become somebody else’s simply because we considered adding additional footage featuring one of their characters to make it viable to sell a TV series or anything else. The MST3K guys didn’t suddenly own all those films they were goofing on just because the producers licensed those flicks. It’s frustrating to have to explain this to fans and folks who are only discovering my work as a result of the recent press coverage or the Kickstarter project or because they read about us on WIRED.com. Anybody claiming to own a piece of The Bunker? That’s flat out untrue, it’s as simple as that.    

Horror News Network: So exactly how do you direct a full motion picture when you are blind? Curious minds want to know :)

Joe Monks: I don’t think it’s as onerous as some people may think, and we documented some of the process in Inside the Bunker, a Making of... piece we hope a distributor picks up along with the film.

The most important things, I think, were the preparation and research. I made sure I didn’t go into the project clueless, and I’m a megalomaniac, so I paid a lot of attention to even the smallest details. I built the main set in my house, so I not only had complete control, but I knew every square inch of it. Since so much of the film takes place in this key set, I could literally walk my actors through every scene, every shot I wanted to get. I could show them the blocking, and tell my DP where I wanted the camera. I designed the lighting and sound rig, and then met with experienced professionals to show them my schematics and equipment specs so they could look it over and make suggestions or show me what would and wouldn’t work. As a result, we could light and mic every part of the set with minimal set-up time. That’s probably a little nutty for most directors, but it gave me the ability to deal with virtually every situation that arose during principal photography. My DP wanted to change a shot? No problem, once we did a walk-through, I knew what he was trying to achieve and I knew how it would fit into the overall scheme of things. I could tell if something was going to conflict with a different shot later in the continuity, or if anything was going to be compromised if we made changes.  I memorized the entire script. Everything, even my director’s notes (which were copious, and included in the shooting script so everybody would be on the same page). I literally lived, ate and breathed the film from the minute Terry West called me after reading the thing and saying, “I’m in.”

The biggest key is the integrity of the performances, though. If you don’t have that, you’re screwed. When people ask me, “But, how can you direct if you can’t see the actors’ faces?” I explain to them that the actors are professionals. You think I want to be embarrassed as a director? Hah! The director isn’t on screen, being stared at by the audience for ninety minutes or more. Most people don’t go to the movies or rent DVDs because they want to see the director’s craft. They want to watch good actors perform and escape into another world for a while. So, I don’t need to worry about one of my actors putting on a goofy face or smirking when delivering a particularly emotional line. They want to look good, so I explain what I want from them, and let them do their thing. If you want to test out a scene’s emotional integrity? Sit down with a film you know and listen to it with your eyes closed. Go rent JAWS and cue up the Indianapolis scene. Listen to those three guys go from joking around to dead serious as Quint talks about “Delivering the bomb,” and don’t open your eyes. You know what? Even without the facial expressions, even without Hooper sobering instantly, even without seeing Brody stare down into his empty cup as Quint tells his horrifying tale, you are emotionally engaged. That scene would be just as captivating and frightening and gut-churning without the desolate seascape or the waves lapping against the hull. Now, sit around with some friends and throw on The Ugly Truth, and close your eyes during the final scene, with the balloon. Just listen, and see how your friends react. Because if you only listen to the performances, you’ll know just how flat it falls. Butler isn’t convincing. Heigl isn’t convincing. And even though it’s a comedy, this is the payoff. This is the big climax. But without the goofy visuals and the balloon guy being forced out of the scene and the cutaway to the news room, it’s all phony. And, obviously so. As good as Butler and Heigl are as actors, that scene is just plain hokey. You don’t believe they’ve actually fallen in love, or that despite their wacky differences they’re going to be a couple. The reason it works when you first watch it is because it’s everything you expect. From the visuals and the attractive leads and the upbeat music and everything the editors could cram in, they managed to sell that ending. But if you close your eyes and just listen to the dialogue? Do you believe Butler’s really a man in love? No, of course not. But I’ll tell you this. You can believe Quint went into the water with 1,100 other men and a whole lot didn’t come out. You can believe, even without being told by the locals, that Brody does not like the water. He sells it. Quint sells the Indianapolis scene. Hooper sells his drunkenness even though it’s so over-the-top, simply by the way he leaps into action when the shark shows up and Quint tells him, “Start the engines.” You can believe all of it, because the integrity of the performances is there, from beginning to end.

For me, that’s it. I’m on a set. No soundtrack. No foley. No visual cues. The performances are everything. It’s just me and the actors, and their ability to convince me what I’m hearing is the real deal. They do that? I’m way ahead of most other filmmakers, because the most important thing—the core—is going to be rock solid, no matter what else gets added in afterward. If my composer layers in fantastic score on top of great performances? Even better. Beautiful cinematography and sharp editing? Jump-inducing sound effects and a snazzy film look? You get the idea. Lots of things can add to the overall quality of the scene. But you still need the core, and that’s what my job is, to get the best possible performances out of my actors. From there? Everything else is gravy.   

Horror News Network: What has been the biggest obstacle in directing this film?

Joe Monks: There’s been a lot of ‘em, let me tell you. We had two hurricanes wipe out scenes in Miami.  We had to reshoot twice in New York and recast one scene due to an actor’s illness. Our composer committed suicide right before we were about to sign a distribution deal, and we learned he hadn’t copyrighted his film score. By then, I was already feeling very Francis Ford Coppola/ Hearts of Darkness.

But without question, the biggest obstacle has been sabotage from within. The headaches and hassles caused by Hart Fisher make everything else  look insignificant in comparison, at least in terms of the filmmaking aspect. Gary’s suicide notwithstanding, Hart was the biggest nightmare of the whole process. From his inability to deliver a rough cut in two years, to whining and complaining when I was forced to hire a competent editor, to his failure to deliver the sound mix and sound design, and finally his refusal to accept my decisions on the cut of the film, he just derailed me at every turn. He keeps claiming to be the editor and an AD during 2nd Unit photography in Los Angeles and a co-producer, but the fact is, he was basically a lackey on the set in L.A.

From the very first day of shooting (which did not include the wraparound), there was never going to be an AD on the film. I discussed this with my wife going into the project, I discussed it with my lead actor Terry West, with my DP, and my script supervisor. Everybody who was important to the project knew that it had nothing to do with me being selfish or jealousy or having a desire to do it alone. The concern was, if I had an AD, there would always be the question: just how much did Joe really do? So, I decided not to use one. I dealt with the actors, not Hart. I didn’t let anybody be the middleman between myself and the cast or crew. If I wanted something from Turner (Jumanville, 2nd unit cameraman in L.A. ), I told him. In fact, in one of the funnier moments in The Bunker documentary, I talk about having to slap Hart down for on-set stupidity during one of our crucial scenes. We were shooting without a permit in L.A., which is risky business to start with. I’ve got Christie Dishner, my female talent, sprawled out on the concrete, in January, and its freaking cold. She’s wearing nothing but panties, high heels and a halter top, laying under a plastic garbage bag, because it’s a body dump scene. Ed Polgardy and Mike Gaglio are playing the cops who find the corpse. Well, we’re working behind this building, and the scene’s supposed to be taking place in a New York alleyway. And, the weather is getting bad on us. It’s getting misty. Luckily, there’s an overhang, so the actors and camera are covered. But, Turner’s lights are getting wet, and enough moisture’s formed on a rooftop that water starts piddling through a drainpipe, which the mics are picking up. So, I say, “Cut,” and tell somebody to plug the drainpipe, because I don’t want it in the scene. What does Hart decide to do, without bothering to check with me? He decides to take my cameraman, and the mic, and run over to the drainpipe to get wild sound. I’m like, “What? No, screw that, leave the camera and let’s get the shot, just stuff the drainpipe.” And, this idiot is arguing with me. He’s telling me, “You’re not an editor! You don’t know what I can use in the edit bay!”

All I can think, though, is, my characters are dry. There’s no rain in the shot. Why the hell would I want to add the sound of rain coming through a drainpipe when my characters aren’t wet? I mean, Continuity 101 would tell you that rain sound without rain is a pretty big no-no. And, not only that, but...wild sound? Of a drainpipe? Are you kidding me? Hey, maybe if you’re shooting Apocalypse Now and you’re getting animal sounds you can’t get anywhere else, yeah, wild sound is important. But, anybody can buy a piece of drainpipe at Home Depot for $5 bucks and reproduce that sound. You don’t need to wreck a shot and run around with the mic and camera in order to get water piddling through a drainpipe. It’s just idiotic. Not to mention, it’s insulting to my actors. Christie, who’s been laying on bare concrete for over an hour in cold weather, doesn’t deserve to be told by some second-rate hack that getting wild sound is more important than what she’s doing. Nor the guys playing the cops, who are working damned hard to give me a solid performance despite miserable conditions. So, I told him to shut up and just let us finish the scene, because I knew what I wanted and we didn’t have the luxury of having all night to get it.  Even then, he wouldn’t let it go. His whole attitude was, since I don’t edit, I wasn’t capable of determining if I needed rain sound or not.

That’s the kind of problems that arose regularly. He continued introducing continuity errors into the edit, even after I locked the cut. Then he’d apologize for it, and go right back and do it again, because he liked it better with the shoddy continuity, and believed that if he kept cutting it his way, I wouldn’t catch it. He’s desperately immature when a decision he makes is overruled, or his choice of a shot isn’t used. Unfortunately, since he wasn’t the director, those weren’t his decisions to make, and he had a hard time handling that. Even when the handful of scenes he edited were tossed out and the film’s new editor, Liz Smith, cut the festival screener (which received great reviews), when he went to put the film look on, he changed the title credits. He not only listed himself as the top editor, but he inserted some other guy who I’d never heard of as the 2nd editor. I mean, the whole cut, from beginning to end, had not one single frame of Hart-Fisher-cut footage, yet he still listed himself as the main guy and dropped the film’s actual editor to 3rd credited, like an assistant. Everywhere he could, he inserted his name. By the time I was fielding distribution offers, I had to hit him with a cease & desist notice, because he was trying to sell the film behind my back, and bragging about it on his blog. Saying he’d ‘laughed off’ an offer...for my film!  

I’m glad I’m through with the guy, despite the implosion of a 17-year friendship. It’s tough to have to make those kinds of decisions, but I’m not like other first-time filmmakers. I can’t pump out a stinker and expect anybody to take me seriously. I only get one chance to make my first film, and to use it to convince people that a blind filmmaker isn’t just a publicity stunt. If I want another gig? My flick better not be a cinematic Hindenburg. I already have a steep enough hill to climb, convincing somebody to give me a shot, when I can’t see the actual footage being produced. I’m not going to get many offers right off the bat, and I’m certainly not going to get even those if my first film is a piece of crap.

Letting Hart Fisher turn my film into garbage wasn’t going to happen, friend or not. When he refused to accept that my decisions on the cut and music and shot selection were final, he couldn’t deal with that. He kept telling me the people around me weren’t looking out for me, they weren’t telling me the truth, that The Bunker would be fine if only I just handed it over and let him fix it and punch it up and yada yada yada. All those positive reviews? Meant nothing. Tom Carnell, features writer for FANGORIA? Didn’t know what he was talking about. Terry West? Wasn’t trustworthy because he’d directed Lord of the G-Strings, so how could I take his word about anything film-related over Hart’s? And so on. For some reason, only Hart could rescue my movie, and only if I stepped aside and gave him total control—including letting him sell it. Believe me, I know the film has flaws, and warts, and I’m well-acquainted with all of ‘em. But since I do trust guys like Tom Carnell and Hacker’s Source editor Frank Wales and Rue Morgue and Ed Polgardy and Terry West, not to mention film festival /horror convention selection guys who pick films to screen...yeah, I think I made the right decision. That it cost me a friendship? So be it. Without him, I’ve secured a distribution offer from a reputable company covering five territories, I have producers in New York working on the financing for a screenplay I wrote, and I’m currently talking with a producer’s rep about representation and other filmmaking projects. While I’m disappointed The Bunker’s not out yet, I’m confident about it being released in 2011 and how my filmmaking career is moving ahead, now that the albatross has been cut loose from around my neck.

Horror News Network: Being that you are blind, was it difficult for you to get investor's and others to take you seriously?

Joe Monks: We didn’t solicit investors for The Bunker in the beginning. Most of the project was financed out of pocket. We did launch a Kickstarter project to help with finishing costs, like putting a real film look on and doing some ADR sessions, mostly cosmetic things.  Right now, as more people see the film, we’re finding it easier to deal with investors and people interested in possibly financing the next feature, because this one has gotten such a great reception, and we did it so inexpensively. Listen, it’s not Citizen Kane, and I know it. But, for a home video NetFlix rental? I think it’s a pretty decent horror/thriller that people who like indie films will enjoy. We’re not going to get 5 star reviews from people who expect to see Avatar. But I think we’ll get plenty of two-and-a-half to three star reviews from people who regularly watch IFC, and independent horror flicks like Pontypool and similar low budget efforts that do a lot with a little. We have impressive performances from our actors, we have good special F/X, we have a solid story and plot. Overall? We did all right. Hopefully, with a few more bucks next time out? We’ll do even better.

Horror News Network: I read that your film has attracted some attention from recording artists, can you tell us who is interested?

Joe Monks: We’ve reached an agreement with Billboard chart-toppers The Cruxshadows, for use of the song Deception, which just fits the film perfectly. I’m very excited about that. The Cruxshadows are one of my favorite bands, I’ve met Rogue several times, seen them live a bunch, and from the very beginning, I wanted this track for the film. Best part? Working with their new label, Wishfire Records? Couldn’t be easier. Another band we’ve reached an agreement with is Bella Morte, a goth/darkwave band I’m really fond of. I was fortunate to meet Andy Deane after a show, and asked him about maybe using a song for a different project. Once I stripped out all the bands Hart wanted to use in The Bunker (none of which ever provided a licensing agreement or release), I contacted Andy about one of their early songs, Remorse. Currently, I’m negotiating with another Metropolis Records recording artist, who I can’t name at the moment, but I’m very excited just to have gotten this far with them. An unsigned band, Stygios, is also supplying a track for the film, and I got lucky enough to hook up with Josh, the band’s frontman, simply by stumbling across his music on MySpace. I guess MySpace is still good for something!

Horror News Network: Has anyone that is already established in the movie business donated to your film?

Joe Monks: Yeah, that’s the current big news, eh? Filmmaker Kevin Smith (CopOut, Clerks), and one of his actors from the currently-filming Red State, Ralph Garman, kicked in a substantial amount of money to make sure the film got funded. I can’t thank those guys enough. The Kickstarter project got support from a lot of different sectors. My wife’s friends in the tech and social media community, the disability community, fellow diabetics who helped spread the word by posting on Facebook and MySpace and Twitter, and a lot of support from the Latino community. I know Monks doesn’t exactly strike one as a particularly Hispanic name (it isn’t, Dad’s Irish), but Mom’s side of the family is Latino, and the Latino community really embraced the project. There are a lot of folks who are going to be getting shout outs and thanks on the web site and the DVD, that’s for sure. But the Kevin Smith contribution? Absolutely couldn’t have done it without him. Hearing Ralph and Kevin mention my project on their Hollywood Babble-On smodcast and commit to helping out? That Smodcast’ll be on my hard drive forever.

Horror News Network: How long did it take to raise the money to finish up this project?

Joe Monks: 60 days. I should’ve listened to my wife about crowdfunding and Kickstarter months ago when she was first talking about it. It’s all-or-nothing, but as a resource for indie filmmakers it’s invaluable.

Horror News Network: If you could work with anyone , who would it be?

Joe Monks: I have a screenplay which some producers want to develop, and our dream-cast includes Kevin Bacon and Chris Cooper. We’d gotten as far as approaching Dennis Hopper about it in early 2009, but shortly afterward Dennis was diagnosed with cancer, so we had to abandon that. I also want very much to work with Lili Taylor on the same film, even though the role is a cameo. I love Lili’s work, and wrote the part specifically with her in mind. There have been discussions with her agent and manager, so we’ll see what happens. I’m a big fan of both Cooper and Bacon, so if the producers can get one of them involved, that would be pretty exciting. I’m not sure that in my head, I have a big superstar in mind, like a DeNiro or Pacino, for the types of films I want to make. I’d be just as excited to work with certain character actors as I would with an A-lister. Being able to work with guys like Michael Rooker or Steve Buscemi for a day or two? That’d be phenomenal, because I genuinely love their work, I like what they bring to the movies they appear in, and while I haven’t seen or listened to everything they’ve been in, I’ve never been disappointed. Rooker? He and Robert Duvall are Days of Thunder. Sure, it’s Cruise’s movie, but Rooker steals every scene he’s in with him, and Duvall does, too. I think I could make really solid, entertaining films, without ever using anybody on the so-called ‘A List’. Give me actors with chops, who can play their roles well, just like athletes on sports teams who aren’t superstars. I’m a big hockey fan. I know it takes gritty, third-line centers and fourth line defensemen to win Stanley Cups. Grinders, they’re called. They know their role and they leave everything out there on the ice, , every shift. They may not lead the league in scoring or get multimillion dollar contracts, but they win you championships. They go into the corners and dig the puck out and make things happen. I want to work with guys like that on every project.  

Horror News Network: What other projects do you have in the works?

Joe Monks: Currently, we’re trying to get a film called Casey’s Attic off the ground, as well as Visions of Sarah. Both are ghost stories, although very different types of films.  Like any movie in the fetal stages, we have screenplays people have been impressed by, we have folks looking into the financials, we’ve approached some talent we’d like to attach to each, so we’ll see what happens. I think the straw that stirs the drink will be the release of The Bunker. That’s going to be a decent business card. It’ll be a product with a distribution deal which we can take into pitch meetings to show what we can do with a really, really low budget, and prove that we’re capable of putting something together with the right resources. That’s the key, getting The Bunker out and onto NetFlix and retail store shelves. I expect at least a couple of doors to open—even if only a crack—once that happens. Which’ll be enough. We can kick ‘em in the rest of the way from there.

Horror News Network: What advice would you give to all the aspiring film makers out there?

Joe Monks: Don’t let anything get in your way. If something does, go around it, or over it, or through it if necessary. But don’t stop. I think more people who want to get into film fall by the wayside due to attrition more than anything else. Screw that. Your friend in your way? Find a new friend. Money keeping you from shooting something? Find people you can trade favors with. Equipment not up to snuff? Get people involved who can supply their own, or work with what you have and be as creative as you can be and improve things later, when you’re able. The guy who shot Paranormal Activity did it for something like eleven thousand bucks. Trust me, you can find plenty of people willing to be involved and help out. You want loyalty? Feed people well. It’s a movie. It has its own built-in appeal, no matter if it’s low-budget or no-budget. You just have to be confident that you can pull it off. If you can lead, you can get people to follow you. Treat them as good as you can, be honest with them, and they’ll understand your limitations. If everybody knows where you’re at and where you’re hoping to get from the get-go, they’re going to stick it out with you, even if it means craft services is Dominoes and McDonald’s or barbecuing burgers and dogs in between takes. Everyone knows, this isn’t easy, and it certainly ain’t cheap. But that doesn’t mean they won’t be willing to go along for the ride if they dig what you’re doing. Bottom line is, the only person that can really stop you is you. Keep that in mind, and you can do what you set out to.

If you fall down? Get back up. If you fail? Try again. If your end product sucks? So what? You don’t get to the end without starting somewhere. People don’t quit driving because they get a flat tire or have a fender bender. Approach it that way. Things will go wrong—every director has a load of stories about absolute disasters happening on set. It’s part of the initiation. Accept it, overcome the problems, and consider yourself lucky. Think about it this way--you’ll have something to share with your fellow moviemakers at the first film festival cocktail party you attend.

Horror News Network: Thank you for your time, Joe. Comment on this article here or on the forum.