Home - About Us - Blogs - Store - Contact Us

20.1 Questions With Douglas Horn
by Anup Sugunan

When you go to a program of short films at a film festival, most of the time the pieces get in because of the content. The production value is usually lacking. On one not-rainy night in Southern California, I was sitting through a festival shorts program and wasn't too impressed until a short called Trailer: The Movie! busted out of the projector with balls the size of bulls' in Spain. That picked me right up. I was sitting on the edge of the seat. It had a lead character with a face similar to the late Brandon Lee. The color was popping. The editing was tight. But on top of all that, it was filled with content that connected with the audience like no other short there.

During intermission, I was just chatting with the strangers around me asking the typical question, "Are you a filmmaker?" Most of them said no except for the guy sitting right in front of me. When I found out that he was the director of this high-quality, hilarious short, I knew I had to get him on this site. With a film like that, I had to get into his head and find out how it was done and his mindset during the process. So, I leaned over and handed him my card. He then handed me his very professional promo packet which represented the film well and the rest is on this page... by the way, he was a nice guy, too.

1. Douglas, tell me about yourself. Where did you grow up? What's your background? When and what made you get into filmmaking? (of course you realize that this is one question)

I was born in Chicago and moved around several times as a kid, but I spent most of my time in Seattle. It was a great place to grow up for a movie lover. Even before the indie explosion, you could see great 'art house' films at the Seven Gables, Guild 45th, Neptune Theater... Seattle is still known for getting the most money per screen of any major US city. All this rain...

After college, I wrote and took a job packing boxes for a tiny Seattle software company. A few years later I was out on my own as a programmer and consultant. I had this little niche of creating custom applications for computers that needed to interface with Japanese systems. The rest of the time I wrote. I wanted to be a novelist. I got one book published. Sold three copies. And I figured that I should go into filmmaking because if you have a flop, at least thousands of people would see it. Boy, was I naive!

2. How did your parents take to your desire to becoming a filmmaker?

Um, I haven't really told them. You don't think they'll read this, do you? Honestly, I didn't mention it to them until I was about a week away from filming Trailer!. They're my parents. They worry. And this career is such a crapshoot in many ways that I can't really ease their concerns. Everyone who makes it, and everyone who gives up for something more stable starts out telling themselves the exact same thing, "I'm the exception to the rule." Of course, I'm the exception to the rule.

I have an advantage that I decided to do this after I'd been out of school for a few years and learned that it was a lot less important what my parents or anyone else thought of me, than what I thought of myself. I didn't know that when I was in college or I probably would have gone to film school. Still, I like having taken the winding road. I have more to say and more experience than I would otherwise have.

3. Do you have a day job?

I don't know anyone who makes a living at short films. I'm trying to make a living as a screenwriter till my directing career takes off. Fortunately, I still have those C++ programming skills to fall back on.

4. Which festivals have you screened at and which ones are coming up?

So far: Taos Talking Picture Festival, Palm Beach Int'l Film Festival, Newport Beach Int'l Film Festival, Deep Ellum Film Festival, Stanford Film Festival and of course the San Diego Int'l Film Festival.

As for what's coming up, the nature of festivals is that you often don't know what the selection committee has programmed till 3-4 weeks before. Right now, I know about the Nantucket Film Festival June 20th & 21st, the Stony Brook Film Festival July 19, and DancesWithFilms in Los Angeles, July 17th. The film was just named a Finalist in the National Short Film & Video Competition, presented by the USA Film Festival. I'll find out if it's to advance on April 27th. I'm waiting to hear from several others and I keep my website up to date (www.trailer-themovie.com).

4.1 Describe your state of mind just before your very first screening.

I'm supposed to say 'nervous,' right? But I really wasn't. I'd seen it several times and had a few test audiences--mostly friends of people involved. I knew people would laugh.

Actually, I think I was curious. Almost a scientific curiosity to see where people would laugh, what would get the best reaction. What would and wouldn't work. Filmmaking is such a long process that by the time you are able to publicly show your work, you're much more interested in the next project than the last one. I wanted to get the film out there and see what I could learn for the next one.

5. Any interesting comments from the audience members during a screening?

Audiences always seem to ask the same questions about films. "How many days did you shoot over?" "How did you find your actors?" "What was the budget?" (I think that all short film filmmakers should agree to always answer this, "$30,000" so that eventually the question will die out. I mean, what could be more boring than what a film cost to make?)

If you get other questions, it means you've reached the audience. My favorite question is when people ask about any behind-the-scenes stories or anecdotes because that's interesting. What a filmmaker overcame to get his movie made is way more interesting than what it cost to make it.

People often ask about the production values--why Trailer! "looks so much like a real movie" as someone once said. I get a lot of guesses at why that is. The real answer of course is that I was lucky to work with some very creative people.

6. What was the budget of the film? Sorry, I couldn't resist.

All short films cost $30,000--even those that don't.

7. What's the purpose of making a short film with the looks of a Bruckheimer flick? Because initally, you were going to shoot on DV, right?

That was the initial plan. I'd never considered doing a 35mm movie. I didn't know where to start. But when I met Paco [Farias produced, edited, and starred in the film], he convinced me of two things. First, that no one would buy the 'Trailer within a movie' concept if it didn't look like an actual trailer. And second, that there was a way to get it done.

On one level, Trailer! is about the way that Hollywood hoodwinks us with slick films that aren't any good. So it had to have that look or it wouldn't work. Also, I didn't feel like I could make fun of something I couldn't do. I love slick, glossy movies. I think it pays respect to the audience. I just don't think it should be put above story and character.

And by the way, thank you. I'm choosing to take your Bruckheimer-look comment in the best possible way.

8. You're welcome... Have you done any other films before this? If so, how many others and what format did you shoot it in? If not, how did you convince these guys to go in on this project (esp. if done w/ favors)?

Nope. First film.

I don't know how I convinced people to join up. A lot of it was fate--meeting the right people at the right time. A lot of it was the quality of the script and storyboards. I had put in my hours polishing it before I decided to go ahead. The rest was sheer determination. Never underestimate the power of one person who won't be swayed from the course. But overall, I'd say fate.

9. What did you learn from this project? Both the positives and negatives. Remember this will be read by a lot of first-time filmmakers, so you can get really detailed if you'd like.

A great question and one I could spend hours trying to answer.

The most painful lessons are those you learn after the film is finished and audiences start watching it. Because then it's too late to fix it on this film. For me, that lesson was not to step on your laughs and emotional moments. Let them play out. I was so determined not to make a slow moving short that I went too far the other way. That hurts, but I'll never forget the lesson.

As for what I learned in the process, I'd say, never give up and never let them see you sweat. Most projects like this happen because someone wills them to. If you're that person, you can never let anyone know when you're down and doubtful of the outcome. The moment people think you're in doubt, the movie dies. Pity parties just aren't a luxury you get. Besides, you're getting to make a film. You don't deserve any sympathy, no matter what goes wrong. Sympathy is for people living in poverty or oppression or for kids orphaned by war. Suck it up!

Another lesson: If you want to get the best, most creative work from your team, you have to let people know they have the freedom to screw up a little. Then, when it happens, you have to stick to your word. Otherwise, people will always play it safe and you'll never get the kinds of pleasant surprises that make filmmaking magical.

Don't worry about your mistakes. You're going to make them. Steven Soderbergh makes them, too. If you can do three things right, all the other mistakes you make won't matter. Script, cast, team. Have a script that knows what it is, that tells a story which people can identify with. Cast it with the best actors you can to play the roles. And put together a production team (producers, dp, editor, production designer, composer, and sound designer among others) who are creative, driven, and share your vision. If these three things are solid, not much can stop you.

Make sure you have support at home. This could mean your parents, girlfriend, boyfriend. In my case, it means my wife, Ahn Lee. There's no way I could have made this film without her behind me. It's just too hard fighting to make your movie if you're also fighting things at home. I'm amazed by what she's willing to give up and put up with so that I can go after my dream. If the situation were reversed, I tell myself I'd be just as supportive, but I doubt it.

You can never have too much preproduction. I've heard that the rule of thumb for features is a week and a half for each week of shooting. But that's with experienced professionals with contacts, money, and full time to devote to it. If you're shooting a short with no money and a team that still has day jobs, I would say plan for one to two weeks of preproduction for each day you plan to shoot. It sounds like a long time. Believe me, it'll feel short.

Always get insurance and a permit. Without insurance, you can't get good locations, equipment, anything. It'll show on the screen. Without a permit, you can get shut down. Even if you're shooting inside a private building, off house power, and with permission, you probably still need a permit. Everyone will tell you that you don't, but if you get shut down, you'll be in one of those situations where you feel like the film is going to die, and yet you can't let anyone else on your team know this or it will.

Caterers are the hidden heroes of Hollywood. Feed your cast and crew well. If you're asking them to work 16 hours a day for several long weekends in a row, at least you can feed them well. Amazingly enough, bad catering also shows on the screen. I know that sounds ridiculous.

Take tons of publicity photos. Even if you don't have time. Use a good photographer with a 35mm camera. Use your lighting set ups, but feel free to stage the shots into 'perfect poses.' Get some black and white prints, some color slides. Publicity photos aren't 'behind the scenes' photos. You only need a couple of those. These are pictures that are supposed to be in the movie. Maybe everyone knows this, but I didn't. I had my photographer shooting mostly behind the scenes stuff. Now I have tons on gorgeous slides I can't really use.

Tell a story you really want to tell. You'll be with it a long time. Hopefully it's the kind of story you want to tell for a while. If you're lucky enough to win some attention, producers will only look at you for that kind of story until you prove yourself elsewhere.

When you're editing, story is most important followed immediately by performance. Nothing else is even in the running. You may have to use a weak take if it's the only one you have that gets a story point across. But if you have a choice between takes where one is pretty good and the composition and camera move are perfect, and the other has a blown camera move, crappy composition, and an excellent performance, you have to go for the performance. You may hate doing it, but you have to make that choice for the good of your film.

Of course, the greatest lesson is, never let your star be the editor. He'll always want to cut to his own close up. Even if he's not in the scene.

10. You mentioned that the audience 'got what you were trying to say'. What exactly do you mean by that?

Well, hopefully Trailer! works on a few different levels. It's a funny story. It's also a satire of big budget movies and marketing. But it also looks at how we as a movie audience have allowed ourselves to fall for these least-common-denominator movies, where you see the same stock shots and hackneyed situations, but we keep on going. Movies are the preeminent art form of our culture and yet we expect so little of them anymore. I think that says a lot about us.

So, with the best audiences, you get the sense that they're not just laughing at the movie, they're laughing at themselves, too. That was what I hoped for when I was making Trailer!, but you never know if people will be willing to laugh at themselves. It isn't easy. Even with a great audience, you have to woo them into it a little. But it's very gratifying when it happens. When the lights go down in the theater, this is what I'm hoping for.

11. Did you make this film for yourself or for an audience in mind while writing it?

For the audience. Always for the audience. A film only really exists when it's projected on a screen for people to watch. The rest of the time, it's just a roll of polyester in a metal can.

Of course, I consider myself a member of that audience. I hope that other people will like what I like. You have to trust your own taste because that's all you have. The minute you start doing things that you don't like or believe in just because you think other people will, you end up with something no one will enjoy.

12. What do you think of stuff shot on DV?

You mean narrative films, right? Because I think DV is a boon to documentary filmmakers. Imagine where you can go and for how long when all you need is that little camera and some 2"x3" tapes.

I was just at the Taos Talking Picture Festival, where I saw Made Up, Tony Shalhoub's directorial debut. It was shot on PAL DV and transferred to 35mm using The Orphanage's 'Magic Bullet' process. The film is a lot of fun with great characters. The DV stuff looks fantastic for DV--as good as it can probably be made to look. Possibly even too good, considering that it is a mockumentary supposedly shot on DV. Other than being a little muddy in the skin tones, I never found the DV aspect distracting.

Unfortunately, I don't think that's representative of most DV movies. I think a lot of filmmakers think that DV cameras are cheap and easy, so everything else should be as well. A film is the culmination of a lot of processes and no one process can make or break it, though any can limit it. DV can limit a movie's resolution, color saturation, depth of field, and overall look, but a lot of movies don't even approach this limit because they don't take the time to light it right, put thought into production design, costumes, makeup, performances, editing, sound design, music, color correction... All of these take time and effort. When they're not there, the audience blames the movie's look on the most obvious culprit--the DV camera.

13. After shooting on film, do you think you could ever go back to DV?

I use DV now for a lot of things. My current project is a computer animated short called "The Crosswalk." We're outputting the finished product at film resolution but all in-house tests, editing, synching for music and sound design, and the like is done on DV. I'm editing it using Adobe Premiere and After Effects. I also use DV to shoot live action tests. Testing out scenes, locations, compositing, and editing techniques. And I'm planning to edit my next live action short using DV dailies.

But I know that's not really what you're asking. Will I shoot a live action film using a DV camera? I won't say 'No' because there might be a project where the look demands DV. But I would be very surprised. I like the process of controlling how the film looks. Every time I see someone proudly proclaim that their movie conforms to 'Dogme 95' standards I wonder why. Didn't that all start as a joke? I don't understand that movement. I want to give the audience the most amazing experience I can. When you put the time into lighting, production design, and all the rest, the added trouble for a professional camera is minimal. Especially since I now know that with the right project, you can always get favors.

What I am very interested in right now, is HD. I've seen some wonderful film transfers as well as some great digital projection. With a few caveats, I'd say it's 95% as good as 35mm--which means you need to have some pretty amazing production values before you reach the point where HD is limiting you. The camera packages are as expensive as a 35mm camera but from that point on, you're saving a ton of resources (whether your resources are money, favors, or whatever) that can be applied to better lighting, performances, production design, whatever. I love the look of film, the control it gives you over speed, depth of field, and all the rest. But unless Kodak offers me a bunch of film stock for my next movie, I'll probably be shooting on HD. HD cameras and digital projection are the technologies that are about to revolutionize filmmaking, not DV.

14. How do you feel about the increasing popularity of indie films? Do you think we're peaking or 'it's just the start, baby'?

"It's just the start, baby!" Audiences are hungry for the kind of stories that indies tell. Hollywood isn't providing it. Sometimes I wonder if Hollywood still can provide it. Something I've noticed now that I'm starting to get Hollywood meetings--while some producers are great, love films, and want to tell fantastic stories--many only seem interested in what will make money rather than what will entertain the audience.

It's an ironic shame. Right now, most other industries are discovering that if you give the customer an enjoyable experience, if you amaze and delight them, then you'll never have to worry about staying profitable. Where did that idea come from? Walt Disney. Business schools and corporations still study the way Walt Disney revolutionized the thinking about customer satisfaction.

So now, when the rest of corporate America is getting on the bus, much of Hollywood--where this thinking started--seems more interested in what will make money than in delighting audiences with wonderful stories wonderfully told. If indie filmmakers adopt this philosophy and Hollywood continues to ignore it, indie films can't help but expand their audience.

15. What's your top five favorite movies?

Oh man, you can't ask a movie lover that question. There are too many wonderful films.

16. Ok then... what are your top five favorite songs?

Anything by Pink Floyd. Robert Cray. Pearl Jam. I really enjoy the tracks on Trailer! -- Mudhoney's "Inside Job" and "The Truth" by Blue Spark. That's the test of a great song--if you can listen to it 10,000 times in the editing bay and still rock out to it.

17. Who are your biggest film influences?

I'm still in awe of silent films. Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin, Georges Melies. You can still see these in LA at The Silent Movie Theater on Fairfax. My animated short is, in many ways a tribute to these.

I'd like to make movies that are about something but still make people laugh. To me, the modern masters of this are Robert Zemeckis, Rob Reiner, Penny Marshall, Danny DeVito, and James L. Brooks. I know that I'm supposed to answer the question with "Kurosawa, Kubrick, and Godard," but I don't feel that way. For all there is to admire about those directors, I feel that overall, they're self-indulgent and are making more of a gift to themselves than the audience. Plus, Kubrick and Kurosawa are dead and kissing their asses in print stands no chance whatsoever of landing me a gig.

18. What if your son said he wanted to be a filmmaker? Does he have a camcorder with which to play around?

Well, my son is two, so I would be very surprised. But I hope to be the kind of parent who supports him in anything he has a passion to do. But let's face it, it's easy when your kid wants to follow in your footsteps. The hard question would be what would I do if my son wanted to become an ice dancer.

19. What's your next project?

"The Crosswalk" is a six-minute computer animated movie about a crosswalk sign guy who escapes into the real world. It should be complete by August or September. I think of it as a 21st century Buster Keaton film. I'm working with three very talented animators and I think the end result will delight audiences in a way that would make Walt proud.

I'm also shooting a new live action short in August called "Back Up, Please" which I hope to have ready before the end of the year. It’s a drama and the structure is more conventional than Trailer! but I think the story and characters will really affect people. I want to try to recreate the production values and audience response of Trailer! if I can. Part of me wants to prove it wasn't a fluke before I move on to direct a feature.

20. In addition to the cops shutting down production and Paco editing himself into all the cutaways, what other horrorific/funny things happened during the shoot?

Well, the one that still gives me night sweats is the lost footage. One of the key shots--the one we thought everyone would go home talking about--is a saw blade thrown straight at the hero of the movie-within-a-movie. It tracks at him full speed until he catches it daintily with two fingers and gives a big toothpaste-commercial smile (complete with extra-cheesy tooth glint).

Since we liked Dan, our star/fight coordinator, we decided that instead of actually throwing a saw blade at him like a shurriken star, we'd roll the film backwards in slow motion while running the shot in reverse. This took some real acting on Dan's part, by the way. The six-second shot took six hours to film. An eternity on this film where we were knocking out all the other footage at a lightning pace. The video playback looked great. The only problem was that there was a miscommunication in the camera department and the exposed shot got recanned as a short end. Which was mislabeled. And promptly lost.

In the end, we developed every short end we had of roughly the right size. But what came back from the lab was a big roll of orange-strike (unexposed negative that's developed) and a lab report that said there was no exposed film in the order. We didn't have the shot and we didn't have any short ends of the right size to be the shot. Those were some dark days.

Of course none of this happened till we were finished shooting, so getting the equipment and crew back together was going to be damn hard. Once a project like this wraps, it takes an act of congress to get everyone back for a reshoot. I was tearing my hair out trying to make it happen. Paco never believed that the shot hadn't been in with the short ends. So he put the 1000' roll up on a bench and ran through the whole thing. It was there. It turns out that the lab had seen the beginning, end, and most of the middle were unexposed and assumed the whole thing had been sent in by mistake. If Paco hadn't actually checked, we would have lost the shot.

Trailer: The Movie! (2001); Horn of the Moon Productions, LLC; Written & Directed by: Douglas Horn; Produced by Paco Farias, Melissa Guzman, Douglas Horn; Cast: Christopher Heltai, Paco Farias, Dan Southworth, Emily English, Jon Briddell; DP: Clay Westervelt; Music: Brandon Roberts; Logline: "When two filmmakers discover their blockbuster is really just a bust, they cut together every half-decent shot into a misleading trailer to dupe audiences and save their careers."; Website: www.trailer-themovie.com.

Read Part 2 of the interview with Douglas Horn.

Let us know what you thought of this article.
Email us FilmmakerInterviews@yahoo.com.

Copyright © 2002 - 2008 Filmmaker Interviews. All Rights Reserved.