Larry Cohen

by Michael Doyle

  Frank theorizes that the mutant babies are the beginning of a new superhuman strain of humanity “that will finally eclipse our own.” He believes that they could be the next evolutionary step in our development, “a way in which the human race can survive the pollutions of the planet.”

  I think it’s only natural that if these monsters were actually born into our world, we would speculate about their origin and purpose. Where did they come from? Why were they born? Was it by accident or design? We would immediately suspect that they were the unfortunate product of pollution, or some unknown disease or contagion. If they were a natural part of our evolution as human beings, I doubt they would arrive so suddenly and dramatically, as these things often take many thousands of years to establish themselves. But it makes sense to me that Frank would consider them as a new strain of humanity and the inevitable result of the terrible pollutants that affect the earth, air, and water. People would need to find some way of surviving any impending environmental disaster and it would probably have to begin with a genetic transformation in our DNA. We would have to change to suit our new surroundings. Of course, it’s also interesting and disturbing to think that this new strain of humanity will supplant us, in the manner in which humans replaced the Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals. Will this strain be a more intelligent form of the human race or will it simply be a more durable one designed to survive the new, poisoned world we are creating? It’s probably better just to put these questions out there and let the audience decide and debate them. I just make these movies.

  So, you didn’t feel compelled to give the mutant babies some kind of origin?

  No. I just thought it would be more interesting to offer some loose, grasping explanation. It’s just a theory Frank has, one of many theories that would probably be offered as the authorities fumbled to discover what the hell these creatures were.

  The mutants have a built-in homing device and can form a telepathic link that allows them to locate their blood relations. Where did that idea come from?

  I just thought it was another intriguing — and perhaps inevitable — development of these monsters and their continuing evolution. It’s also something that is hinted at in the first film when the monster baby comes back and meets his brother; and is made clearer in the second film when the creature homes in on its parents. There have been reports of family members and blood relations having psychic links to each other. I’ve heard of several cases where twins have felt their sibling’s pain from miles away. They may be separated by a city or a state, sometimes even by oceans, but they still experience the same physical symptoms and agonies.

  What was the general response to It Lives Again?

  It’s funny you should ask that question, because I was reminiscing with someone about the response to the movie just a few days ago. I’ll never forget the night we organized a sneak preview of It Lives Again at a theater on Hollywood Boulevard. I remember it was held on a Wednesday and Ted Ashley, who was the head of the studio at this point, and a bunch of other executives were in attendance. That screening was incredible. In fact, it was too incredible, if you can understand me. We ran the picture and the audience went crazy for it. They were screaming and hollering and leaping out of their seats. They were reacting to the movie in a way that I hoped an audience would: they were scared and were clearly having a good time. They were responding to such a strong extent that the executives became increasingly convinced that I had placed “ringers” in the crowd! Afterwards, as we walked out of the theater, Ted Ashley accused me of having peppered the audience with people who were going to react strongly for his benefit. I said, “Ted, there isn’t one single person in this audience that has anything to do with me. I didn’t bring anybody here tonight except myself. All those people in there were honestly enjoying the film.” He said, “Well, if you didn’t put people in that audience you should have.” Again, I protested my innocence but he didn’t believe me. None of them would accept the fact that those were genuine responses. They continued to claim that I knew all of these people and I continued to insist to the contrary. I don’t know. The executives thought that the entire screening was an elaborate set-up designed to engineer a false response that would impress them. What can you do?

  Is that a common practice in Hollywood?

  Using ringers? Well, I was later informed that this was in fact the standard practice during some preview screenings. Filmmakers would often bring in people to cheer and scream loudly in order to generate a positive reception for their movie. It was impossible for me to convince the Warner Bros. executives that I had not rigged that screening. Looking back, I think the crowd that night were serious horror movie fans and were relishing the whole experience, as only horror movie fans can. The horror crowd can really create a great atmosphere, particularly if the movie is playing well and they are warming to it. It was just unfortunate, that’s all. But that screening is certainly one of the oddest little evenings I’ve spent in my career.

  You’ve already indicated that It Lives Again did not repeat the remarkable box office success of It’s Alive.

  No, It Lives Again was nowhere near the financial success that It’s Alive was. I knew that matching that kind of unique success was going to be difficult and, lo and behold, that was pretty much the case. But I do like It Lives Again. I think it’s pretty good. I do know that at the time it was to hit theaters, Warner Bros. were about to release Superman. Of course, Superman was going to be this giant blockbuster with Marlon Brando and Gene Hackman. You have to remember just what a huge deal that movie was back then, and so It Lives Again pretty much got pushed aside. All of the studio’s interest and resources were focused firmly on Superman and that was that. Of course, why shouldn’t they put all their energies into Superman? Warner Bros. had hundreds of millions of dollars tied up in that picture and it was certainly where their hearts were lying. Everybody wanted to see Superman and I wanted to see it, too. It Lives Again was just small potatoes in comparison. I also don’t think It Lives Again was properly promoted and the picture suffered for it. The studio didn’t spend the necessary money promoting it and, ultimately, the box office receipts reflected that.

  Did you complain to the powers-that-be about it?

  Well, Warner Bros. did an ad campaign that was based on a suggestion that I’d made. I’d conceived this idea that we could show a child’s birthday cake with these monster claw marks tearing through it. The studio followed my concept, but they didn’t do a good job of executing it. I mean, you couldn’t really tell what it was. It just looked like a complete mishmash, when it should have revealed exactly what the movie was about. We should have built upon the great reputation and interest in It’s Alive. By the time I’d objected to what had been done, they had already gone to press. They had printed all the posters and the ad campaign, and that was that. There was no going back. What they often did in these deals at the studios is they would give the producer a consultancy on any ad campaign. In other words it was the same old story: you retained consultancy rights which basically meant that after they had completed the ad campaign and it was finished, you couldn’t do anything about it! They would merely show it to you and you got to give them your opinion. Of course, your opinion didn’t really matter as it was far too late to change anything. That’s the consultancy clause in the contract. It’s absolutely meaningless. It’s a fucking insult, actually. By the time Warner Bros. came out with the ads for It Lives Again, it was far too late. In those kinds of situations you were often stuck with something that was totally inappropriate or bafflingly obscure or just plain stupid. I mean, this was a horror film! It wasn’t that difficult to come up with something that could have resonated with the public.

  I’d imagine that it would be easier to devise an ad campaign for It’s Alive and It Lives Again, than say The Private Files of J. Edgar Hoover.

  Oh, definitely. Horror is a distinctive genre, like the Western and science fiction genres, and they follow a certain method and mood. You only had
to glance at the ad campaign for The Exorcist or The Omen to know they were horror films. I mean, black often seems to be the color when advertising a horror movie as it gives the graphics a threatening feeling. The Private Files of J. Edgar Hoover was a political film and was a difficult sell because that genre is not as well defined or as popular as horror. Audiences have a grasp of what appears to be scary but when you fuck around with that approach, there’s a good chance that you are sending the wrong message about what your movie is. This isn’t rocket science, you know? It’s all very simple. It Lives Again was a horror movie and it needed a good ad campaign to lure people into the theater. That’s all.

  Why exactly do you think that horror movies are “an antidote to reality?”

  I think all movies are in some ways an antidote to reality — not just horror movies. They are an escape from the boredom, the repetition and the predictability of real life.

  Wes Craven once famously declared that horror movies were “The boot camp for the psyche.” I was wondering what active purpose you think horror films like It Lives Again serve in society beyond being grim entertainment?

  I think people have fun watching horror films. They are pure fantasy when compared with the many things that actually exist which are threatening to human beings. As a species, we innately realize that we are finite and there is so much fear that people have, the fear of violence, disease, war, poverty, whatever it is. Those are all very disturbing things for people to deal with because they are real and can kill you. Horror films allow you to be afraid of things that you are sure don’t exist. So, you say, “Oh, I can be afraid of this and still have a good time because it’s just like a ride at an amusement park.” You understand that you can’t really be hurt by this movie. There aren’t really monster babies like in It Lives Again, or creatures like the Alien in Alien, that can destroy you. It’s all make-believe and there is some safety in knowing that we can be scared of them because it’s just a harmless release of energy and adrenaline in a controlled environment, the movie theater or your own home. It’s just like when you tell children stories about Hansel and Gretel and the witch, or Jack the Giant Killer. Now, it’s okay to scare kids with things that don’t really exist, but if you were to scare children with something that is very common and familiar, it would really terrify them. For example, if you were to inform the kids that the babysitter is going to kill them, that’s very different to telling them there is a witch in the woods that is going to boil them in a pot or put them in an oven. I mean, you certainly wouldn’t want to tell them that their schoolteacher is going to kill them because that would really freak them out! It’s just too close to home. So, it’s the varying degrees of reality and unreality, the familiar and the unfamiliar, mixed up with the fact that people do like to be scared, that makes horror movies work. I think Wes Craven is suggesting that watching horror films is a cathartic process for some people and maybe he’s right. I’m sure they are, but it’s mostly about the amusement audiences derive from watching them. Beyond that, I really don’t know.

  Full Moon High (1981)

  Full Moon High is almost a transitional work for you in that comedic elements will now be ever-present in your movies, sometimes to the detriment of the scares and atmosphere. Is that fair to say?

  Yeah, I’d agree, definitely. Looking back, I guess I was going through my happy period back then. I was enjoying myself during that time, but that might have been coincidental with my divorce. After I broke up with my first wife, who is a truly wonderful person, by the way, and no harm to her, but afterwards I was out playing around and being a kid again. I was chasing after girls and reclaiming that kind of life. At the same time this was happening, my movies started to get more fun-like and comedic. Even when there were opportunities to exploit the seriousness and darkness of a particular theme or subject, I still found a way to somehow make the story more upbeat. It was just my happy state of mind. I mean, one of the principal reasons I’m a director is that I get to chase after all these great-looking actresses!

  Well, some observers have interpreted the werewolf myth as an unleashing of repressed and beastly sexual desires.

  Gosh! [Laughs] Well, I was right on the nose again then, wasn’t I?

  So, the film simply grew out of this newfound frivolity and optimism?

  I guess so. I went to American International Pictures and said, “Look, I think I can make a comedy out of I Was a Teenage Werewolf,” which was a horror film they had made in the 1950s starring Michael Landon. Since AIP owned that movie and thought my proposal to do a comedic version was a good idea, they let me use the same premise of having a teenage werewolf attending high school. I resisted using the title I Was a Teenage Werewolf — which I could have done — and decided to call it Full Moon High. After that, I could go out and do whatever I wanted with the idea, which was great for me because I wanted to attempt some comedy — some broad comedy — and this project gave me the opportunity to try something different.

  And were you happy with the results?

  I think Full Moon High is probably one of my lesser films, but I still enjoyed the picture and had a good time making it. It really has a warm spot in my heart. I liked working with the cast, particularly Adam Arkin, who played the werewolf. When I cast Adam, he was on Broadway playing Nathan Detroit in Guys and Dolls. He had great charm and comic delivery, but for some reason he never became a big star. He’s worked continuously over the years and is now directing himself, mostly in television. Adam gives a very likable performance, but at one time I was also considering Jay Leno for the part if Adam proved unavailable. But I’m glad it worked out with Adam. There are a lot of big laughs in the picture, like when the guy is trying to shoot the werewolf but accidentally shoots the cameraman. It’s very broad stuff, but it was fun to do. I like seeing Full Moon High with an audience because they laugh and have a good time, and the movie also has something to say.

  Why exactly is it a “lesser” film for you?

  The picture has its flaws, but then most of them do. Its intentions were never serious. There is commentary in there but you have to search for it. You have this kid, who is the werewolf, coming back to his hometown after being away for twenty years. He still looks the same, like a teenager, but all of his friends and the people he knew are now middle-aged. He is a literal monster and transforms at each full moon, but they have all turned into monsters of one kind or another also. Age has monsterized everybody and I think one of the main points or sub-themes of the picture is that’s exactly what happens to you. As we grow older, life has its negative effects and ends up turning you into something you once weren’t. Physically, people look horrible and they learn how to act horribly, too. Along with their looks, these characters have lost their hopes and dreams which have not come true. They must accept that their life has not worked out the way they wanted it to and that their existence is a perversion of what they had originally envisioned it would be. They are locked in an unhappy marriage; they are stuck in a job that they never really wanted; they have children that they don’t like. So, it’s turned out to be a miserable world for them, and the kid who is the werewolf comes back and — aside from being a monster — he’s probably better off than the rest of them because he hasn’t changed at all. Everything has frozen in time for him and so the disappointments and disenchantments of middle age have still not arrived. He just goes around and bites people, that’s all!

  Those are some fairly meaningful themes you are addressing for what purports to be just a knockabout horror-comedy.

  Oh, absolutely, but that’s why I did it. Just to make a comedy of stupidity wouldn’t have interested me unless there was some serious subtext to it. We talked before about that strong sense of alienation and people killing their own blood relations because of it, and it’s more or less the same thing here. Life in America had changed a lot since the 1960s, and some of the values we once held dear as a country no longer have the same validity. As time has gone by, a lot of things have cha
nged in our perceptions of ourselves and other people; in our ideals, our politics and our attitudes. So, there is a lot of room there to explore ideas and satirize some of these things in the movies.

  The film was financed with tax shelter money, correct?

  Well, the tax shelter came in later. First, we made the movie and then they sold it to the tax shelter. Back in those days, almost all the movies that AIP were making were made with tax shelter money. Frankly, I haven’t got the slightest idea how tax shelter money works and why! I just know that they had the picture and it was their right to do whatever they wanted with it. They were the financial officers who controlled the purse strings. As long as they didn’t bother me as far as what the content was and the editing and the production, and simply let me do what I wanted to do, I didn’t bother them regarding the financial aspects of the project.

  1981 has come to be known as “the year of the werewolf.” Interestingly, Full Moon High was made before The Howling, An American Werewolf in London and Wolfen but was released after them.

  Yeah, that’s right. I guess there were all kinds of werewolf movies appearing that year, but I don’t remember the chronological order they came in. It’s all a blur now, but that was just one of those things that sometimes happen. It still happens. You get a lot of the same kinds of movies released at the same time. That year was the time for werewolves.