HIGH BROW AND LOW BROW: JEFF LIEBERMAN ON 70S CINEMA

Filmmaker Jeff Lieberman came into prominence in the 70s, directing such cult favorites as SQUIRM (1976) and BLUE SUNSHINE (1978). While he’s best known for his compelling independent horror films, his influence on the pop culture landscape during that transitional decade in cinema reaches far beyond his celebrated oeuvre. A talented writer in addition to being a true actor’s director, he collaborated with a wide array of iconic creatives and influential production companies. After graduating from the School of Visual Arts in ’68, Lieberman found himself working for the notorious Cannon Films, re-editing foreign titles for the American market. His first paid directing gigs were commercials for name brands like Excedrin – while early writing assignments included rewrites (sometimes uncredited) of indie screenplays.

A natural offshoot of his commercial and film work, Lieberman spearheaded the successful advertising campaign for the cult hit Tommy (1975) just before tackling his first feature length film. Belying his dark cinematic output, his interest in comedy led to some fascinating connections and a few projects that, disappointingly, never saw the light of a projector. His refreshingly candid 2020 book Day of the Living Me highlighted many of these off-the-radar exploits – including a Broadway musical version of KING KONG pitched to John Lennon! Way ahead of the STAR WARS zeitgeist, Lieberman also envisioned an updated 2001-inspired FLASH GORDON. His commercial instincts, sometimes hindered only by timing, made him an essential player on both coasts.

Working relationships with such disparate companies as American International Pictures and Janus Films, gave the filmmaker a unique vantage point on the changing social and moral climate of the motion picture industry at the time. His insight into the decade that brought porn into the mainstream and ushered in the phenomenon of the “blockbuster” is essential for both fans of his work – and 70s cinephiles. I recently caught up recently with the filmmaker, anxious to hear more on his thoughts regarding that crucial decade of cinema.

In 1969, when you were assisting “film fixer” Mary Franklyn re-edit the Swedish film INGA into a more commercial vehicle for American audiences, the motion picture landscape was at a crossroads. Bloated studio musicals like HELLO, DOLLY were seeing competition from edgy countercultural films such as EASY RIDER. Were you aware of this juxtaposition at the time (as a filmgoer)? Was there a particular film (or films) at the time that made an impression on you?

I was keenly aware of these new entries into the movie landscape. I never had any interest in big Hollywood movies with very few exceptions. Then movies like BLOW UP and EASY RIDER came along at just the right time for me because they fit into the zeitgeist of that time and inspired me to pursue film as my media form of expression.

After Cannon’s success with JOE, they attempted more ambitious projects such as WHO KILLED MARY WHAT’S ‘ER NAME? You were hired to help rewrite the script (unofficially) and also serve in an official capacity as the location scout. Since you were performing both jobs simultaneously, did you find working as a location scout helpful in your writing process? Were there any films playing at the time (1970) that served as inspiration for your rewrite?

It wasn’t a ‘re-write’ as much as it was an ongoing punch up and polish – a running work in progress. In fact, most of my writing came right there on location during first rehearsals. I would literally cross out lines, scribble in new ones then pass the pages under the camera to the director or actors, all on the fly. As far as being a location scout goes, that job, by definition, has a direct impact on the script. For instance, if the script calls for a park and you find one with a huge staircase that leads to it, you might suggest to the director that a scene of characters climbing those stairs be added into the script, or maybe an establishing shot from the top of the stairs. I did this on a constant basis later on with the five features I directed, always altering things to fit in with the locations we found which never quite fit what was described on the written page.

In 1971, the two highest grossing films in the U.S. highlighted the growing divide between big budget studio fare and grittier sociopolitical titles. Both Norman Jewison’s musical FIDDLER ON THE ROOF and Tom Laughlin’s BILLY JACK filled theaters – while serving very different audiences. Another hit that year that would prove to be very influential was Daniel Mann’s WILLARD, a film that would help ignite a new subgenre: “nature run amok.” What is your take on the big box-office hits from that year (which also include THE FRENCH CONNECTION, DIRTY HARRY and THE LAST PITCURE SHOW)? Did you see WILLARD? And, if so, did its plot in any way inspire your screenplay for SQUIRM?

I did see WILLARD. Thought it was lame and had no effect on me whatsoever. FRENCH CONNECTION sure did though, from a filmmaking point of view. I think it impacted all young directors of that time. That ‘gorilla’ style of filmmaking employed in a big budget studio movie really shook things up for years to come. DIRTY HARRY was also a ground breaker. The idea of how our criminal justice system had caved to the ultra-left voices of the times resulted in allowing criminals to get away with anything, even murder, based on ‘technicalities’ in the law. Sure does ring true today, even more than back when that movie was made. Ironic that Clint Eastwood, perceived as just a pretty boy actor has now accumulated such an enormous body of work as a filmmaker, and he’s right up there at the top when it comes to social statement movies.

1972 was a huge year for independent film. While your short anti-drug film THE RINGER was making the rounds at high schools and winning awards, the micro-budget horror film THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT and the pornographic DEEP THROAT were finding audiences and even some critical respect. Suddenly these modest “outsider” productions were being exhibited in major theater chains. Were you aware of this sudden change in what was acceptable in theater exhibition – and did it have an effect on the kind of projects that you pursued?

I certainly knew about DEEP THROAT. Who didn’t? But you didn’t have to actually see it to fully understand the huge social impact it had. Lawyers had taken the phrase ‘redeeming social value’ and manipulated it to be applied to outright hardcore pornography which suddenly became acceptable to the masses when a terrible actor playing a psychologist in a white lab coat was taking notes on just what made a “good girl” go so so bad. This gave a green light to the pornographic flashbacks. This formula held up in the courts and accounted for dozens of movies and hundreds of millions in revenues. Far as LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT goes, I never saw it back then and actually still haven’t to this day. The poster art just turned me off. One of those instances where you didn’t have to see the movie to see the movie.

Your work for Janus Films in the early 70s allowed for projects with such distinguished artists as Rod Serling (an experience covered in your book Day of the Living Me). When working with Serling for THE ART OF FILM series that you created, did he offer any notes/advice on the scripts? Given his successful, prolific career as a writer, did you learn anything from him about the craft during your recording sessions?

Actually, Rod seemed fine with every script just as they were. I can’t recall him ever wanting to change the wordings or anything.  He was only concerned with getting foreign pronunciations correct and always looked to me for direction which is funny because I had no idea what the proper pronunciations were but just pretended I did. I did ask him if he’d ever bring back the TWILIGHT ZONE and he dismissed the idea based on his belief that there just weren’t enough good writers out there to do it justice. I raised my hand to volunteer, but he just smirked.

1974 saw the rise of the rise of the sequel (GODFATHER PART 2, TRIALS OF BILLY JACK) and the domination of the disaster film genre. But the year also saw a proliferation of arthouse foreign dramas – and independent films tackling relevant social issues such as John Cassavetes’ A WOMAN UNDER THE INLFUENCE. Were there any films from this particular year that spoke to you as a writer? Your 1974 screenplay treatment, PINK AND BLUE, (co-written with Marc Rubin), was to have been a satire on the growing women’s lib movement. Was that a reaction to the more serious fare that had become in U.S. arthouses?

Not so much a reaction to those movies as it was to the fact that “women’s liberation” had suddenly appeared front and center as an important issue of the times. Since both Marc and I saw everything in satirical comedic terms, no matter how serious the subject actually was, the whole movement seemed ripe for a black comedy with a social message that actually supported the concerns of the movement. A ‘male chauvinist pig’ is mistakenly given a full sex change and then thrust into the receiving end of how a woman is treated by men in society. Eventually TOOTSIE would deal with the subject in a similar way, but unlike PINK AND BLUE it actually made it to the screen.

 

The year you shot your first feature film, SQUIRM, was also the year that JAWS was released. Though the films are very different as far as budget and narrative, JAWS did usher in a second wave of “animals run amok” films that proliferated for the next decade. Did you feel that you were ahead of the curve as far as the subgenre was concerned?

Not at all. All this labeling of genres and sub genres came way later. “Kids in the woods” movies, “slashers,” “nature runs amok,” etc. Back in 1975 when I was shooting SQUIRM, or more importantly a year before that while I was writing it, none of that stuff existed. My inspiration came from all those 50s sci-fi movies that so informed my youth that I just naturally gravitated to it. If anything, it was THE BIRDS that served as a sort of model for SQUIRM. The movies that I think you’re referring to that resulted in this overall label of “nature runs amok” movies – GRIZZLY, DAY OF THE ANIMALS, FROGS, etc. were a direct result of the success of JAWS for sure but not SQUIRM. So, if I was ahead of the curve on all that I certainly wasn’t aware there was a curve back then.

In 1976, the year AIP released SQUIRM to an enthusiastic audience, filmmaker Alfred Hitchcock and screen icon John Wayne both released their last films. However, one of the more prolific genre directors from the period of “radiation monsters” was still very active and also working for AIP. Bert I. Gordon, who was responsible for THE AMAZING COLOSSAL MAN and THE SPIDER among many more, wrote and directed THE FOOD OF THE GODS – a “modern” variation on the giant creature film. Given that you were fascinated by those films as a child, how did it feel to be working in the same playground with Gordon? Both productions were big hits for the company. Did you have any interaction with Gordon at the time?

No. I didn’t even know who Bert Gordon was. Never heard his name in fact. First off, SQUIRM wasn’t made by AIP. They didn’t finance it. It was independently financed, then when it first played at the Cannes film festival market, Sam Arkoff loved it so much he bought distribution rights for the whole world. That’s why the titles read “An AIP release” not “production.” So, I really didn’t know much about AIP at that time nor the movies they made in the past.

While STAR WARS in 1977 was breaking records at the box office, independent films were still flourishing and playing on the same screens as the majors. You were working on the advertising for big budget musical SGT. PEPPPERS LONELY HEARTS CLUB BAND while prepping for your second low budget feature film BLUE SUNSHINE. Having been involved in the industry in such disparate productions, how did you feel as a creative navigating such extremes?

When you have a specific original idea, you automatically stay focused on it and shut out everything else. Until that idea, that vision, is realized – transposed into a movie, it only exists in your one brain. So, without realizing it, you’re actually nurturing it and protecting it until it can hatch and grow into a screenplay, then a movie production where upwards of fifty people who have their own visions and ideas can make a mess of your original vision at any moment.

In ’77, your Cannon peer William Sachs had his low budget satire THE INCREDIBLE MELTING MAN taken away from him and edited into a more straightforward horror film. MELTING MAN (a title riff on one of your favorite” radiation films” THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING MAN) often played with SQUIRM on drive-in double-bills. Were you aware of Sachs’ problems with his film – and did you two ever discuss the state of the low budget film industry at the time?

Ha. I never knew Billy had that movie taken away from him until you’re asking me right now! After my initial contact with him at Cannon our paths rarely crossed except by chance as two New York based filmmakers. I only learned about MELTING MAN from ads for the movie and in fact have never even seen it to this day. Bill is a great guy. A funny guy with a very original personality. Very smart but also the type that doesn’t take orders well. Like someone else you know – me!

While the industry was still reeling from the impact of STAR WARS in 1978, the notion of the anticipated blockbuster was still rather new. Obvious big titles like JAWS 2 were playing on a larger number of screens, but there was still room for smaller regional releases to play in legit theaters (as well as the second run and drive-in circuit). Do you think that BLUE SUNSHINE, if released even a few years later, would have been given the same kind of release?

BLUE SUNSHINE was a weird duck as they say. People couldn’t figure out how to label it. Was it a horror movie? A thriller? A horror-thriller? A ‘cautionary tale?’ An ‘anti-drug movie?’ I think the problem with the distribution was the movie itself. At that time the three major networks were all getting into the ‘movie of the week’ thing and depending on movies already made to fill their rosters while slowly gearing up to make their own movies for those prime-time slots. To those buyers, BLUE SUNSHINE really looked and felt like one of them and in fact was done for a similar budget that their own movies of the week would be done. So two of them, ABC and CBS made offers at the Cannes film market to skip theatrical altogether and premiere on their networks. And they offered literally twice the budget of the movie for just two showings!

Since I owned a big piece of the back end I couldn’t resist and agreed to it because, money aside, on either of those networks way more people would get to see it than had it played theatrically at that time with no stars to pull in an audience. As it turned out both deals were predicated on passing the censorship rules and I was given a long list of cuts to make that not only would’ve ruined the movie and made it almost incoherent but would shorten it to around 70 minutes which would not fit into the movie of the week format. So it wound up showing on the CBS network at 11 pm. with no cuts but a huge cut in money paid to us.

BLUE SUNSHINE was one of the few horror films that year that had more on its mind than scaring its audience. Larry Cohen’s IT LIVES AGAIN and George Romero’s DAWN OF THE DEAD were also genre films released that year that also wove social commentary into their narratives. Were you aware of this distinction at the time? Like you, Cohen was a true actor’s director and generated compelling performances from his cast. Were you aware of his work – and did you feel a kindred spirit with him at the time?

I loved the ad campaign for IT’S ALIVE though I never saw the actual movie. Never saw DAWN OF THE DEAD either and had zero interest in all thing’s zombies, so I was not aware of any social commentary in either Cohen’s or Romero’s movies. In fact, that pretty much goes for all of the horror genre movies of the times. To me, social commentary in genre movies pretty much left off with the atomic bomb sci-fi movies of the 50s. At the time I made BLUE SUNSHINE the only “kindred spirt” I had was Brian DePalma, though I never even met at that time.

The success of STAR WARS overshadowed the last year of the decade, with many of the major studios either releasing or greenlighting big budget spectacles. However, ’79 also saw several big budget dramas connect with audiences including the most successful film of the year in the U.S., KRAMER VS. KRAMER. In ’79 you were still working for Janus Films and collaborated on an Academy Award-winning documentary short – among other projects. Did working with Janus and iconic creatives like Sidney Poitier change your perspective as a moviegoer at the time? Did it have any impact on you as a creative?

Actually, it did. Working so closely with Janus and exploring the works of the cinematic masters, along with my collaborations with Edgar Lansbury and Joe Beruh, broadened my creative spectrum tremendously. I made THE ART OF FILM with Rod Serling and SQUIRM. I invented my own explanation; “I do highbrow and low brow.” And would even demonstrate by raising one eyebrow up while frowning the other, a skill I developed as a kid maybe subconsciously it’d come in handy as an adult to explain my whacky behavior.

1979 was also the last year that independent horror films were able to succeed without relying on an established formula. HALLOWEEN (released in late ’78) had played successfully throughout the year – and reached number one at the box office October ‘79. Dozens of “dead teenager” films would be greenlit over the next several years – freezing out low budget genre filmmakers who had no interest in following the formula. Given your cult status at the time, you were offered what eventually became JUST BEFORE DAWN. Were there any other genre films in that era that you turned down because of the quality or derivative subject matter? 

There was one that I can remember. In 1979, right before I was about to set off to Los Angeles to cast JUST BEFORE DAWN, an Italian producer approached me about writing and directing a movie that would be a Dario Argento presentation. It was called MUMMIES! The people trying to put the movie together were the same Italians who financed Romero’s ZOMBIE which was released in the states as DAWN OF THE DEAD. They made a ton of money on that movie and were keeping it all offshore to avoid Italian taxes, or so I was told. So they wanted to repeat that feat with another one and use those proceeds to finance it. The pitch was ‘Dario Argento presents, a George Romero film, ZOMBIE. Now Dario Argento presents a Jeff Lieberman film, MUMMIES! And with that the artwork was revealed, hundreds of mummies walking (very slowly I suspect) with their wrappings peeling off like toilet paper.

It was exactly the same as ZOMBIE only with a Charmin twist. I was unmoved but politely asked for the script. I was told there wasn’t any. The idea was to take this add, with my name attached and Dario’s name presenting to the Cannes Film festival and make advance sales. After they’ve made enough sales they would pay me to write the script and then direct the movie. The rest is non history because it all ended right there. However, cut to 24 years later when my movie SATAN’S LITTLE HELPER was invited to the Brussels International Fantasy Film Festival, (BIFFF) and to my delight, one of the other invited guests was none other than Argento. After socializing a bit, I asked him if he remembered MUMMIES and he certainly did. ‘So, you knew about it? The ad with the bandages peeling off like toilet paper?’ He nodded and laughed. I laughed too with no reason to take it any further. That, my friends, is showbusiness.

 

Bradley Steele Harding
Latest posts by Bradley Steele Harding (see all)
    Please Share


    No Comments

    Leave a Comment