“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds."
Wednesday, November 26, 2014
Interview: Dan Lashley
I discovered Dan Lashley first through links from IMDB to his blog Wide Weird World of Cult Films (from which I lifted the photo in my review of Alien Beasts). Recently, he and his wife, Erin, who has her own film blog (In It for the Kills) have started a blog about terrible films (Bad Movie Couple). Here's an interview we did over Twitter - or perhaps, given the photos, it was Peter Bark being interviewed by a redhead with very large eyes. The interview has been slightly edited.
thinking of interviewing fans of bad films and wondered if you'd be
interested in being a subject. Just posted an example on my blog.
Yeah I'd love to.
1) Tor Johnson or Cuzman Huerta (Santo)?
I've seen more Tor's work, but I'm a wrestling fan so I gotta pick the late great El Santo.
[Tor was also a wrestler.]
2) Name as many prolific directors worse than Ed Wood Jr. as you can in 5 minutes.
Damn it, I always forget that about Tor.
millard, andy milligan, jess franco, uwe boll, bruno mattei, chester
turner, william beaudeux (sp) [Beaudine], rey [Rene] cardona jr, ovidio assonitis
david decouteu, david heavener, donald jackson
13. Eh, not bad. [I say 12 - Turner wasn't prolific]
3) You've had a blog on cult films for a while. Why start the new one on bad films?
I've always wanted to work on a blog with my wife, who does her own blog. We have a good chemistry together (cont)
She's the smart one, able to analyze a film, and I'm the goofball that like to say funny shit. It's a marriage made in Heaven.
You specialize in rare and obscure films. Does that cut you off from
the mainstream? Is there value to reviewing films no one else sees?
really. I try to check out mainstream stuff when it interests me. I
just feel there's more than enough people reviewing (cont)
movies. I like to find stuff that doesn't have much of a presence
online (like imdb). As for the second question.. (cont)
Of course there's value in films other don't see. If one of my reviews gets someone to seek out that film, awesome. (cont)
if me condemning a movie makes then NOT see it, well they are smarter
than me. Although I do enjoy other people's take on it.
Someone put their time, money, and occasionally love in these films. They may stink on every level but (cont)
do have a value to them to someone. Just about every movie is someone's
favorite...except Chain Letter no one likes that shit.
[Haven't seen Chain Letter!] 5) They make a bad movie about your life. What's Robert Z'Dar doing with that dog?
dog is actually a demon who instructs Z'Dar to do really petty things
to people who annoy him. I call it "Son of A Bitch Sam"
6) What was the best year for bad films?
I think either 88 or 89. It was at the height of video stores buying
ANYTHING. People with a camcorder were making movies (cont)
that were getting shelf space in video stores. It's how I got tricked into watching Woodchipper Massacre as a kid. (cont)
I'm gonna cheat and say 1988 AND 1989 were the best two years for bad films.
7) WideWeirdWorldofCult always lists 6 things. Why 6? Do you ever have to re-watch to come up with the last one?
kinda let that drop because I found there were always things I had to
leave out. Very rarely do I fight to find stuff to list. (cont)
This way I do it now doesn't restrict me and I still try to make it at least 6 things as a nod to the way I used to do it.
And the reason for 6 was because most people did 5 or 10. That's why the few lists I do are 15. I like weird numbers