THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT. Movie review and Interview with director Robert Krzykowski and Star Sam Elliott

July 20^th 2018.

Days after having been denied an interview with legendary actor Sam Elliott at the Montreal Fantasia Film festival (Too many journalists had requested some of the limited time that was allocated for interviews, and I was just too late to fit in), I get a call around 12.45, during my lunch break at work. A spot had freed up in an hour to be able to sit with Sam Elliott. I was to have roughly 15 minutes. I’m horribly unprepared, but still jumps at the chance. An hour later, I am sitting in the press room, waiting for my chance to be face to face with the velvet-voiced, epically mustached cowboy. Time stretches and the distributor has other plans for his star, and I’m starting to feel that I may not be able to do the interview. Fortunately, I am soon lead to the green room, and am informed that Robert Krzykowski, the director of the intriguingly titled THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT which stars the grizzled sex-symbol, is also waiting in the room. Brief moment of internal panic; as ill-prepared as I am, I am even less prepared to discuss a film I haven’t yet seen with the director. I will have to improvise, and am warned I have now 5 minutes to do the interview.

I step into the room, and am greeted by the young filmmaker and the veteran actor. The 73-year-old thespian gets up and firmly shakes my hand all the while staring deeply into my eyes, his furrowed ebony brow hanging over his intense gaze. At this moment, I understand right away why the guy is a star; the charisma is oozing all over the room.

Sam Elliott and Robert Krzykowski on the red carpet for the World Premiere of THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT at the Fantasia Film Festival. (Photo by Julie Delisle)

I get out my phone and a camera as back-up to record the interview, and proceeds to kneel down in front of the duo.

SAM ELLIOTT: That’s not going to be very comfortable. You should be comfortable. Sit. Please.

BD: Thanks. (laughter) To director Robert Krzykowski) How did you think of Sam Elliott for that role?

ROBERT KRZYKOWSKI: We were looking for an actor that had a very human quality and decency, and also mythic and iconic, and the list was very, very narrow. (Laughter). It was Sam, I mean, John Sayles spoke very strongly about Sam. As well as our casting director Kellie Roy. We sent him a script and I wrote Sam a letter explaining what this was and why the title was so strange. He called shortly thereafter and it was a really nice phone call. I didn’t know for sure if he’d do it or not but I just felt very supported in that phone call, that he believed in it and we knew it would be special if Sam was able to be part of it.

BD: (To Sam Elliot): How do you feel when you get a movie with such a title?

SAM ELLIOTT: It’s kind of like the audience is going to feel; They’re not sure what they’re in for going in to see this film. When I first saw the title I just thought: ‘‘This is going to be a fantastic read…either that or it’s not going to be a good read at all.’’ (Laughter) And it was a fantastic read. The tale that’s told is so much deeper and so much richer than the fantastic quality of the title. When I read the script there was no doubt in my mind that I wanted to be part of the film. I spoke to Robert over the phone and as he said, he wrote me this letter that came with the script, and the combination of all three just made me know this was something I wanted to do.

BD: (To Robert): And I know you are very confident that the title itself is strong enough to sell the film, and the poster too, which is amazing, because you didn’t really cut a trailer for this.

ROBERT KRZYKOWSKI: No, we have a trailer and we love it, but we wanted the first audience to…it’s very, very rare…my favorite way to see a movie is to just know nothing. And we felt that, either out of respect or whatever it might be, we thought it might be special for that first audience to just know nothing, and Epic was really supportive, there were a lot of conversations about what do we put out into the world. We decided; let’s keep it very minimal and let this audience experience it for what it is. So in some ways, we built this whole movie for this audience tonight, because after that, the word will be out on what it is and what it’s like, why it is what it is, and it will be received however it’s received, but I think that was a gift we wanted to give to this audience because it’s rare.

BD: Well trust me, you have probably the best audience you could ever wish for here. They are terrific and you’re going to have a ball tonight. Enjoy your show tonight.

(More of the interview below)

That very evening, I sit with 700 other patrons, filling the Hall Theater of the Concordia University to capacity, ready to experience THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT.

The film starts with a broad yet brilliant visual gag, as a young Nazi officer stares nervously at his watch, preparing to meet with Adolf Hitler. The hands on the watch are replaced by a swastika. A moment that would have been quite at home in a Mel Brooks comedy. But once we get back to present day, where the young upstart played by Aidan Turner (Doing a pretty good job of evoking Elliott) is replaced by a disenchanted Sam Elliott, there is a distinct tonal shift in the film. Maybe this won’t be a broad comedy after all.

Elliott plays Calvin Barr, who has killed Hitler in a top-secret mission during World War II, and now lives unassumingly in a small quiet town, trying to come to terms with his past. His peace will be interrupted by envoys from the government, cashing in on his legendary status to send him on a mission to hunt down a germ-ridden Bigfoot somewhere in the Canadian wilderness, and prevent a global epidemic.

Writer-director Robert D. Krzykowski does an impressive high-wire act of shifting from the sublime to the ridiculous, occasionally slightly losing balance in what is more attributable to the complex nature of the narrative than an actual lack of talent, and gleefully plays with the audience’s expectations who was probably sitting in for a wild, campy fantasist romp, but is instead offered a melancholic exploration on the nature of heroism.

“It’s nothing like the comic book you want it to be” says Elliott during a speech that deconstructs the scope of his WW II accomplishment. It might as well be director Krzykowski talking to his audience, as he offers moments of deep introspection amidst the pulp trappings promised by the title.

Sam Elliott plays the lead with reverence and strength, tapping in on the self-reflective streak he has been on recently (THE HERO), and giving an award worthy performance, making the most of his intensity and a great deal of pathos. In a cinematographic landscape populated by aging heroes, he is more Eastwood’s Bill Munny than Stallone’s Barney Ross. His toughness is dampened by a potent sense of regret and even guilt, and violence is a last resort that only leads to loss.

Sam Elliott as the reluctant legend Calvin Barr, in THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT.

Production values are impressive for a low-budget film, and the majestic musical score by Joe Kreamer (MISSION IMPOSSIBLE: ROGUE NATION) helps to confer to the film a sense of melancholic heroism. Special effects are by a dream team of legends in the field, including Douglas Trumbull (CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND, BLADE RUNNER), Richard Yuricich ( 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE), and Rocco Gioffre (ROBOCOP, GREMLINS) although it should be noted this is not per se an effects heavy film.The effects featured are the best kind; the ones that you won't notice.

In the end, while the pulpish promise of its outlandish title will attract fans of psychotronic cinema, and insures that it will obtain an instant cult status, Robert D. Krzykowski created so much more, and delivered a surprisingly deep film that will stand the test of time.

After viewing the film, I had to get in touch with the director who graciously accepted to answer more queries..

(Note: to avoid getting carpal tunnel syndrome, THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT will be from now on referred as H&B)

Director Robert Krzykowski (photo by Julie Delisle)

BRAIN DEAD: You originally started up as a cartoonist, with an ongoing online series called ELSIE HOOPER which started way back in 2002. How old were you when you started it...?

BOB K. I was eighteen when I started ELSIE HOOPER. A lot of the friends and collaborators I’ve met in filmmaking came from the seeds of that little comic. A solid readership kept it going through years of its kind of steam-of-consciousness, experimental run.

Chapter 425 of the ongoing web comic by Robert Krzykowski, ELSIE HOOPER.

BD: What prompted you into creating this series?

BOB K: I started ELSIE HOOPER while studying journalism at UMass. Someone was sitting behind me in class, saw me drawing a strip, and said I should put it in the paper. I met poet and illustrator Dave Troupes through the UMass Daily Collegian. He was doing his brilliant comic BUTTERCUP FESTIVAL at the time. It was a whimsical, sometimes heady comic about a representation of death that decides to embrace nature and philosophy instead of doing his job. Dave’s strip was this lovely, beautiful work that vacillated between broad humor and a really searching exploration of something deeper—sometimes without words; like an existential ‘Calvin and Hobbes’. Dave’s comic told me that the Collegian was willing to take chances and be experimental.

Dave Troupes' BUTTERCUP FESTIVAL, which inspired Robert Krzykowski to create his own web comic.

So I got up the courage, walked down to the basement of the Campus Center where the Collegian was staffed, and I shared the first twenty or so comics of ELSIE HOOPER with the editor there. He liked it a lot, and made it a serialized thing that ran for several years. Since it was serialized, students would contact the paper if they missed a day, so I realized there needed to be a website so students could follow along independently. It became one of the really early web comics that grew into this cult, underground thing. I’ve met a lot of great people through those black and white panels.

BD: Would you say being a cartoonist is a good preparation for being a director?

BOB K: I always thought of the comic strips as something akin to storyboards. So when it came time to try to make H&B, I’d established this background in visual storytelling. I drew hundreds of storyboards for H&B while it crept through development. Those storyboards were carefully utilized through every phase of production. Everyone had them for prep, and on the call sheets during the shoot. Even if we didn’t follow them exactly, it was a great starting point for conceptual discussions. So yes—the comic was instrumental to my work as a director. There was a clear notion of how the movie would look, how the imagery would be framed, and how it would all generally come together in the edit. There are whole sections of the movie that appear as storyboarded, so it was pretty amazing to see those drawings brought to life by a stellar team of artists like we had here.

BD: You also made a short in 2016 based on the comic, using puppet animation. Is this a genre you would want to explore further?

BOB K: ELSIE HOOPER is a really fun journey through science fiction, fantasy, and noir. It’s sweet and sometimes silly, and there’s all these meaningful asides that comment on grief, loss, and depression—and what it feels like to feel different from other people. I think the resolution will be surprising and unique. It has a lot of action and black ink splattered everywhere. It’s goes to some really unusual places to reveal its intentions. That the audience always let me explore that story freely—that was really rewarding.

If I ever make that as a movie, I just need to feel it in my gut, and after all these years, I’d like to distill the storytelling a bit. There’s an interest out there, and I know it would make a lot of people happy to see it come to life after all these years. The short is a really fantastic showcase of what that could be. Looking at the world today, there’s a couple other stories nagging at me first. Someday, if I’m lucky enough to make ELSIE HOOPER with a team of effects wizards, animators, and puppeteers—it would be a joy.

BD: It was an interesting choice to make the short with puppets, so they look even closer to the original illustrations. How is it to film using puppets?

BOB K: Working with puppets is a really wonderful thing. If the puppetry is good, you feel like they’re alive—like you’re spending time with these characters. Actor Sean Bridgers brilliantly voiced and puppeteered the lead character, Ridley Hooper, and brought him fully to life. You look at the monitor, and all you see is what you’re supposed to see, and something inanimate suddenly has movement and life. All this is taking place in three-dimensions, in real time, with physical light scattered over real objects and their surroundings. So it’s this wonderful surreality. And there’s this hidden ballet of trickery that I love. You look beyond the monitor, to the set, and there’s this contorted, sweaty team of focused people in black leotards trying to hide themselves, and coordinate their movements, and deliver a seamless, living performance. And every few takes, there it is, and the make-believe is real. Creatively, it’s a wonderful headspace. So, of course—I’d love to go back someday.

BD: One thing I noticed in ELSIE HOOPER, which is reflected in H&B, is a refusal to glamorize guns, and showing a certain sense of regret in their use. Do you have a Love-Hate relationship with guns?

A man and his gun. Conceptual drawing by Bob Krzykowski with final comparison image from the short.
Copyright 2018 - Robert D. Krzykowski

BOB K: I don’t think the loudest voices are allowing for an open conversation that might lead to something better. Gun violence disturbs me to my core. I think this generation has shed a lot of tears watching the news unfold around one tragic shooting after another. It’s shattering that we hurt one another in this way. If someone safely owns a gun and they don’t fetishize the power that comes with that ownership—fine. I can respect that. But there are a lot of people that have an unhealthy relationship with their guns. And that’s deeply worrying.

I believe we live in a violent culture, and we can be cavalier about some of these very American storytelling elements—like guns, violence, and the masculine hero that asserts his power through carnage. In the real world, these things are tragic. And they have repercussions. I’m trying to explore characters that are effected by their choices. I want them to exist in something resembling reality, even in a story such as this one with elements that are fantastic or preposterous. I’m using a lot of these elements as you would in a parable; to draw an illustration. I’m trying to write from an honest place. There’s a basic truth about our relationship with killing, and we have to reconcile that before we can ever move forward as a people. No life is worth the exchange rate we’re paying right now.

BD: Movies have long associated guns with heroism, but Sam Elliott’s character seems to resent having to use them to fit that limited definition of heroism. However, there is a sense of unrelenting decency about Calvin Barr (The scene when he returns a lottery ticket to a convenience store is a good example). What is your definition of a hero?

BOB K: You used the word I would have chosen. Decency. My grandfather was a hero to me because he was decent. He was a soldier in WWII, he worked for years at GE, and he raised a big, beautiful family. I don’t think I really knew the word when I was little, but I understood it later on by my observations of him. So many good things blossomed from his decency. If someone lives by that code, and they allow that goodness to grow and expand as they age and mature—to me, that’s a hero. It’s not about physical strength or material wealth. Those things come and go. It takes mental toughness to overcome our lesser selves, and to strive to be decent. There’s a few billion people out there trying to do the exact same thing, and I’m sure you know a few. I sure do. Something to aspire to.

BD: The theme of the aging hero has been a staple of pop culture in recent years, but it feels like you fall more in the UNFORGIVEN category than Miller’s DARK KNIGHT RETURNS or THE EXPENDABLES.

BOB K: My parents encouraged I make friends with older people every chance I got. In high school, I worked evenings in a nursing home in Western Massachusetts. I saw the loneliness and isolation there. I’ve never been able to shake the faces of those people at their happiest—and at their lowest. My biggest fears are loss and regret. And those are the primary themes of this movie. I’m sure that’s no coincidence.

UNFORGIVEN is the ultimate deconstruction of the American western because it lays people bare to their most flawed, petty, imperfect selves. Everyone seems cursed and fated. I think Gene Hackman’s work in that film might be among the finest performances of all time. He’s my favorite actor—both he and Walter Matthau. They always felt like completely real, flawed human beings. That really interests me.

BD: I have to agree.

BOB K: UNFORGIVEN is one of the great American films because it’s totally honest about how ugly and imperfect we can be. There’s no heroes. It doesn’t glamorize its violence. It’s human. In the end, it leaves you feeling strange and conflicted. I love how symbolic UNFORGIVEN is. Hackman’s idyllic homestead is turning out to be this poorly measured, uneven house. His best intentions wind up manifesting themselves as this cockeyed, crooked thing—not unlike himself. That’s most of us, I think.

BD: It’s a totally different approach to aging heroes than THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS or THE EXPENDABLES.

Another side of the aging hero. Original artwork by Frank Miller for the Cover of issue 2 of THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS (1986)

BOB K: I admire THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, but it’s totally fascist and cruel. It deconstructs the mythic heroes in its pages to lay them bare and subvert them in a fit of punk revolt. It’s an angry work, and it’s the perfect Batman story for its time and place—and maybe more timely now than ever. Frank Miller’s exploration of violence, duty, and masculinity remains pretty bleak, but essential. H&B pivots to something more hopeful, and I think there’s a place for that too—studying different kinds of mythic heroes and heroism through different lenses.

As for THE EXPENDABLES, I see those movies as big budget cartoons meant to make people laugh and high five each other. They’re not mean-spirited, and they don’t resemble reality. It’s a bunch of action legends coming together to have fun and deliver for their fans. I’m neither here nor there on it.

BD: Stallone is worth more than this as a filmmaker.

BOB K: I’m much more fascinated with the Stallone that wrote ROCKY—one of the most tender, heroic American movies ever. It reminded us that a hero can lose and still win in every way that matters. I’m taken by the Stallone that acted in COP LAND—one of his most sensitive, understated performances. Stallone is seriously gifted. I wish he did character work more often. He’s a really moving, intelligent actor. I wonder if he has any scripts squirreled away that don’t match his superstar persona, but that he’s always kinda wanted to get to. I’d love to see him venture off into a role that pushes him into uncharted waters. He goes there now and again, and I’m always enthralled. He’s really great in the last two ‘Rocky’ movies. Again, he’s a gifted writer. His story sensibilities are all over those movies. How did you get me talking about Stallone? (laughter).

BD: When I first read about H&B, I have to admit that at first, I was expecting something like Coscarelli’s BUBBA HO-TEP, but while both films deal beautifully with a great sense of melancholia, yours is way more down to Earth.

BOB K: The very first person to congratulate Lucky (McKee) and I when H&B was first announced was none other than the great Don Coscarelli. Literally the first words of encouragement from any friend or colleague came from Mr. Coscarelli in a lovely email to Lucky first thing that morning. It felt cosmic and special that he would be the first person to reach out and wish us luck on this journey. I don’t know him at all, but that was special to both of us. He’s a supremely talented filmmaker that also seeks to illuminate some truth amidst the fantastic and surreal, so if you found some symmetry here, that puts us in great company.

Never too old to save the world. Bruce Campbell and Ossie Davis in Coscarelli's BUBBA HO-TEP (2002)

BD: Bruce Campbell gave in Coscarelli’s film a lovely portrayal of a forgotten hero on the decline.

BOB K: Bruce Campbell was my first print interview ever at the UMass Daily Collegian. I still have that interview on an old tape recorder. He’s a hero of mine, going way back to BRISCO COUNTY JR. which I followed obsessively as a little kid. Bruce was kind and supportive when I got pulled into film while I was still in college. Some producers in LA had found my comic online, and wanted to make a movie of it. Bruce gave some pivotal advice so I didn’t fall into any traps in those early days. Just a lovely person, and great to his fans—generous. I’ve never met him in person. Lucky worked with Bruce on THE WOODS. They had a great collaboration there. Really striking, visual, textured movie.

BD: Back to H&B. in the film, Sam Elliott’s character says: “It’s nothing like the comic book you want it to be”. Was it important for you to go beyond the audience’s expectations?

BOB K: There was never a conscious attempt to radically subvert expectations with this film. This wasn’t written in rebellion. I wasn’t writing to counter anyone or anything. It was a gentler intention than that. I was very aware of the expectations of that title. That’s true. But it was made with a lot of respect to a thinking audience. I trusted their ability to track the story organically and let it ebb and flow as it would. That’s the joy of discovery. I felt like we were inviting audiences into something surprising—inviting them to discover something worthwhile. That was the spirit in which this was made. I didn’t want to put the audience in a passive role. At its core, this is a simple character study. But it leaves enough room for interpretation that the audience can participate in the storytelling and feel welcome to own a piece of it as they exit.

BD: So in a way, you wanted to go beyond the myth.

BOB K: Whenever the storytelling crept close to pure mythologizing, I would pivot to something that felt a bit more human or grounded. All the characters, great and small, seemed to have something to say about how we treat one another, and I wanted to follow those impulses through to their logical ends. So that was the balance I needed to find. And it’s not an easy line to ask an unsuspecting audience to walk with you.

That central speech you mentioned is very much intended as a moment to speak to a certain sector of the audience, and to let them know that they’re still in good hands. I wanted to say that we’re aware of what we’re doing here, and it’s okay to leave your expectations behind now. There’s more to be discovered here if you’ll just trust us, and let the story and the film-making take you there. And in that, I think there’s the joy of discovery, and taking something away with you.

BD: Am I wrong in thinking that constant pebble in Calvin’s shoe is his regret of being unable to profess fully his Love to Maxine? If so, in that particular way, he reminds me a lot of Anthony Hopkins’ character in REMAINS OF THE DAY.

Caitlin FitzGerald as Maxine, the object of Calvin's affection in THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT.

BOB K: I haven’t seen that film, though I will seek it out upon your recommendation. The pebble in the shoe is emblematic of so many things Barr has been carrying with him. Biggest of all is the void that Maxine left in him. With the pebble, something small is released. There’s a change, however small. Sam plays that moment splendidly. That shot of him smiling down. It’s hopeful. We so want Barr to find his peace. At the eleventh hour, Barr finds a couple symbolic moments of hope and connection in that graveyard, and it’s really moving to see how Sam conveys all this so simply through his weary body language and a warm, rare smile that signifies we can finally exhale with him.

BD: He certainly does. Sam has a heck of a warm smile (makes my wife melt every time she witnesses it). A thing I noticed that was common to both ELSIE HOOPER and B&D, both films start with the main character looking at a watch. The passage of time seems to be an important theme in B&D.

BOB K: Time and watches play a big part in ELSIE HOOPER. There, time seems to be standing still. Or is it a trick of the mind? Or something else? Yet to be seen.

In H&B, time is incredibly nebulous and untethered. There, each timeline is dependent on the narrative weight of the other. The story can’t work without one timeline interacting with the other. This isn’t a time travel movie, but it reveals information in a very similar way to the classic time travel films. Information is withheld and revealed to color and expand the story as it develops. Looking forward, we look back. And back, foreword. Each timeline becomes more meaningful because of the gravity of the other.

BD: This non-linear approach to storytelling must present its own set of challenges.

BOB K: Editor Zach Passero and I saw the edit between timelines as a series of waves gently coming in and going out. We wanted the flashbacks to feel equally immediate to the 1987 timeline—never obtrusive. There were carefully designed transitions in the script and storyboards. They were meant to help create cohesion and flow.

There were a hundred ways to weave the edit of a film like this. We chose the path that highlighted the emotional peaks and valleys without giving the audience whiplash. That said, there are a couple moments that are specifically structured to goose the audience and direct their attention in a much more radical way. The two timelines are having a conversation with one another—and hopefully the audience feels a participant in that conversation as opposed to a passive observer. It certainly asks a certain amount of patience and interaction, and I hope that patience is rewarded in the end.

Sam Elliott tracking the Bigfoot in THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT.

BD: Is Calvin Barr’s killing of the Bigfoot a way to also destroy the legend that he has become by eliminating Hitler all those years ago?

BOB K: Barr doesn’t feel he contributed anything to history, so I’m not sure he buys into his legend at all. But we in the audience do, because we see it from the outside. He was never able to square himself with the notion of killing someone. Even if that someone was Adolph Hitler. If you’re gonna have a mythic story question the very nature of killing—who better at the center of that question than the one person everyone says they’d happily travel back in time to kill? There’s a ‘Twilight Zone’ element to this. And it’s a conundrum.

Barr is a good man. He doesn’t believe in killing, yet he’s a natural at it. Barr killed Adolph Hitler, recognized him as a monster, but the act took something of his soul. And it didn’t alter the war in any meaningful way. History marched on just like you read about. So he exchanged his life and his happiness in the service of others.

The fact that Barr comes home in the end might have surprised him more than anyone else. If he believed anything about his legend, it might be that he’s cursed—or doomed. Once Barr comes home, I think he’s changed in some subtle way. He’s able to abandon the legend set forth in the film’s title. In the end, Barr simply becomes “the man”.

BD: How does a beginning filmmaker manage to get someone as legendary as John Sayles as a producer?

Writer-director John Sayles.

BOB K: John had been a hero of mine since I saw MATEWAN as a kid. That film taught me that movies could have something to say and entertain at the same time. His name stuck with me for years. When I ended up working in a video store through college, I was able to watch all his movies, and just admired the honesty of his characters, and the reality of the situations he put them in.

Years later, around 2012, I was given an opportunity to produce a film—almost any film I wanted—on a respectable indie budget. A venture capital firm offered me the chance, and I’d successfully produced before, and they thought I had good taste and judgment. So this was a big opportunity. I immediately reached out to John Sayles through his reps to see what he might be interested in making for the kind of budget they were proposing. He and I met, we talked, and we got along easily. We both love old movies, and writing, and exploring ideas of who we are and how we got here, so we had plenty to talk about.

BD: What was this film about?

BOB K: John wanted to make a movie about Julius and Ethel Rosenberg—this historic 1950’s spy trial, and the surrounding frenzy that ensued. It was an excellent script. It was supported by the Rosenberg’s living children. It was a very tense, human, even-handed look at he subject. It was, and still is, a timely story. Coincidentally, I’d done a ton of research on that subject for another project, and it was very familiar to me.

''Doomed to die'', as was the film project by John Sayles about the infamous spy couple. Although it may resurface eventually.

Ultimately, the head of the firm wanted John to admit that the Rosenberg’s were war criminals in what became a very confrontational, very one-sided conference phone call. The head of the firm wanted John to agree that the Rosenbergs got what was coming to them before we could make the film. John explained he was coming at this story from the middle—trying to find the truth in it—a journalistic approach. When John tried to explain that, the head of the firm got frustrated and continued his rant. I interjected, and stood up for John, and his integrity as a filmmaker, and I chastised the people on the call for being inappropriate and unstudied on the very project they were seeking to finance. I parted company with the firm about two hours later, and they’ve never made a movie since.

I’m a producer on my films to avoid situations like this. I raised nearly a fourth of the budget for H&B. I actually get in and work on the business side until smoke comes out of my ears. I really wanted to do that for one of John’s movies, and we wound up producing together on ELSIE HOOPER and H&B instead. I still think about the Rosenberg project often. It was really something. A story worth telling. And John has a real vision for it. Maybe one day...

BD: That's certainly a film I would love to see. How is it to work with him?

BOB K: I think John knew I’d just burned a major bridge at the venture capital firm, and he started looking out for me. I don’t know why exactly. I think he’s just a good and decent person, and he knew I needed some guidance and direction, and he had my back from then on. He produced my short film ELSIE HOOPER offering guidance and wisdom throughout. Over the years, John has taught me a lot about writing, his film theory, story structure, and discipline.

Eventually, John read H&B and he wanted to see it made, as written, without compromise, and he helped me see that through over several years of careful navigation and council. At every turn of this production, he was there—giving notes, offering advise, and guiding us through rocky waters. This movie wouldn’t exist without him. And I probably wouldn’t have a career. He’s one of my favorite people, and a supremely intelligent, decent human being. I owe him a lot.

BD: You also have been working a lot with writer-director Lucky McKee.

BOB K: My close friend and producing partner Lucky McKee has been with this project for eight years. We met when I co-produced THE WOMAN for him in Massachusetts in 2010. He’s stayed with my wife and I for a couple long summers while we’ve worked on various projects—including a summer back in 2015 where we really started cooking on H&B. Lucky was instrumental in navigating this path, sharing his wisdom, and helping me learn storytelling and direction in a totally open, transparent way. Lucky believes in helping the next guy over the wall. He’s supremely generous, and knowledgeable, and a staggeringly talented director. He’s also an excellent puppeteer, a natural actor, an accomplished author, and one of my best friends.

Above all, Lucky cares about people. And it’s infectious. There’s a communal spirit to him and his work. It’s rare. Lucky and I compete with one another for the biggest movie collection. We’ve had some Black Friday blowouts together. I think he’s still got me beat by a hundred or so. I’ll have to ask the current count. Has to be well over a thousand movies apiece now. Maybe two thousand at this point. I’m afraid to count.

Lucky makes the best film recommendations of anyone I know. Wanna watch a good movie tonight? Go on Twitter, give Lucky an idea of what you’re looking for, and he’ll steer you to something amazing that you’ve never seen before—or didn’t know you wanted to see. Hit him up for your next movie night. Tell him Bob K. sent you! Haha.

BD: I just might. You managed to wrangle another legendary name in movie-making for H&B; Douglas Trumbull.

BOB K: Douglas Trumbull’s legacy as a filmmaker and effects wizard has been with me since I was a kid. I’ve always enjoyed classic effects, and cloud tank photography is a hobby of mine. I have hours of high speed tank footage, and it’s all because of trying to emulate Doug’s gorgeous practical effects work with water, controlled lights, powders, and paints. My kitchen can look like ‘Breaking Bad’ when I’m trying to create a new effect.

By chance, Doug invited a group of Massachusetts filmmakers to his lovely studio in the Berkshires a few years ago. As everyone left, I showed him an old HEAVY METAL magazine that was from the month and year that my wife was born. February, 1984. It said, “Douglas Trumbull’s Brainstorm” on the cover. Inside was a big article about his latest film. I’d had this magazine for years. Doug hadn’t seen it in forever and he signed it for me, and was just incredibly pleasant and kind. And I figured I’d never see him again.

A couple years later, I made the short film ELSIE HOOPER. The Massachusetts Film Office and the Berkshire Film Commission were very supportive of that little short, and they liked it a lot. Diane Pearlman at the Berkshire Film Commission sent the short to Doug, and I got a surprise email from Doug saying he’d like to meet. So we met. We talked a bunch about effects—old and new. He showed me his 3D MAGI high frame rate process—which is the best, most immersive 3D I’ve ever seen. And we began exploring how we might work together.

BD: It's surprising to see not only his name associated with the film, but also another legend of visual effects, Richard Yuricich.

BOB K: When H&B went into production, Doug was one of the first to offer his services and open his doors to our team. His ideas are so big, and so brilliant, and he’s such a joyful, curious, searching person. I adore him. He made the movie better at every turn. He knew the constraints on the budget and found ways and methods to make these big ideas emerge on the screen. All of our earliest conceptual meetings were done at Trumbull Studios under his guidance and supervision, he became a producer on the film, and he brought his good friend and legendary effects genius Richard Yuricich on board to supervise all the effects work in the film.

FX wizards Douglas Trumbull and Richard Yuricich on one of the stages of Trumbull's own FX house; Entertainment Effects Group (EEG) in the eighties.

BD: What was Richard Yuricich's involvement in the film?

BOB K: Richard Yuricich and I had so much fun coming up with all these wild ideas and old school solutions for them. Richard loves problem solving. He is undeterred in the face of the biggest challenge. He cuts right to the best methods and spends real time making sure his idea is understood and can be implemented in an elegant way. Miniatures, matte paintings, whatever trick we could use. There’s a lot of subtle modern effects work in the film as well. All at the service of the story. Richard was always pushing for the least amount of effects that could serve the most immediate elements of the story. So we were judicious and tactical. There’s nothing terribly flamboyant about the effects work here. Which makes all these legends being a part of it all the more unique. Their work is nearly invisible. But it’s everywhere. Richard has a twinkle in his eye, he loves film, he’s a true storyteller, and he’s such a happy person—up for any challenge. We worked closely together and it was some of my happiest memories on the film.

BD: You do have an impressive visual effects team for a film that wasn't at first glance a showcase for special effects. I see in the credits you also had Rocco Gioffre, another legend in the field.

BOB K: Richard brought on Rocco Gioffre, one of the greatest matte painters and effects artists of all time. And Rocco is actually in the movie as the Nazi at the desk checking in all of Young Barr’s personal belongings. So I suppose Rocco is partially responsible for Hitler’s death, having let this makeshift gun slip past him. I don’t think Rocco had ever acted before, but he’s a lovely person, and he has a killer look, and it just kept occurring to me—he should be in this film. He’s so good in those opening moments. He sets the tone and energy of the film. And then he’s behind-the-scenes doing the very same thing as an effects wizard in a bunch of shots that he did himself or supervised when he was on set every day. Rocco is in the bloodstream of this film. That’s such a wonderful realization. So. All of a sudden I looked around—and I was surrounded by my heroes. It’s all totally unbelievable. I’ve looked up to these guys my whole life, and suddenly I’m creating a movie with them.

Matte Painting legend Rocco Gioffre working om CLIFFHANGER (1993)

BD: Speaking of special effects, the costume work on the Bigfoot is particularly impressive...and also different than the usual depictions of the creature.

BOB K: Spectral Motion came on board led by Mike Elizalde and his wonderful team. They created this old-fashioned movie monster with The Bigfoot. We wanted to go way back to the Universal Monsters. Man in a suit. Great makeup. Very classic. Totally captured the tortured Bernie Wrightson spirit we were going for. There’s even a touch of the 2001 apes in there. Yet, it’s not a Bigfoot you’ve seen before. It’s smaller, stranger, more emaciated. It has these haunted, Gollum-like eyes. Just one more of the little surprises we tried to bring to the movie—keeping a lot of these elements honest somehow, but just left-of-center.

With this entire team, sometimes wonderful things just happen and you don’t question why. You just keep marching forward and hoping to stay on course. You seek out like-minded people. Or maybe they seek you? Again, it’s all mysterious in some way. I couldn’t have been in better company here. It was really special.

Mike Elizalde touching up Ron Perlman's makeup on HELLBOY (2004)

BD: Sam Elliott is amazing as Calvin Barr. Was he your only choice for the role?

BOB K: Sam was one of the earliest choices, and certainly the one that meant the most to me personally. When Sam said yes, I really started to believe this thing could work. He exemplifies so many of the things we were trying to shine a light on here, and he embodies that classic, Norman Rockwell-esque heroism. He’s iconic in his own right, and so that energy is transferred to the character he’s playing, and it’s a thing to behold—in the making of the film, and with an audience.

A hero right out of a Norman Rockwell illustration. Sam Elliott as Calvin Barr in THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT..

BD: What do you feel he brought to the role?

BOB K: Sam brought a depth of seriousness to the entire project. He told me he wanted to find the reality here, and he had something he wanted to say about how we treat one another today. And that was certainly something I was striving for as well. So we were unified in our hopes for this thing. And we talked a lot. We collaborated openly. There are so many moments where Sam’s humanity is revealed through this character, and he gives the audience something of his soul—and something that should seem preposterous or surreal becomes moving and meaningful.

BD: He does bring a lot of humanity and pathos to a character that could have easily been a caricature in the hands of a lesser actor.

BOB K: Sam understood and embraced the parable-like elements of the story, and the magical realism at play, and he was careful never to tip it into something exploitive or silly. He met some of the most bizarre elements head-on, and I was able to watch the crew as he delivered these scenes one after another. People were visibly moved. He could give you chills. Ron Livingston’s off-screen reactions to Sam’s speech about Nazism and the plague-like notion of ideas was something I’ll never forget. This is a very strange story to balance, and we were walking on a razor’s edge, and Sam is the reason this film has a sense of realism and honesty—because that’s what Sam embodies as a person. He’s honest. There aren’t many actors that could balance what he’s doing here. It’s a thing to reckon with. He’s heartbreaking and magnificent in this film. I can never repay him for wishing to be a part of it. It meant the world.

BD: Was the pulpish title helpful in getting attention from talent and investors, or was it making things more complicated?

BOB K: No one ever suggested a better title, so it just stood. Changing it to something more ambiguous or simplistic felt sneaky somehow. Either way, the audience would discover this totally strange thing waiting for them. The title felt like the most honest, straightforward way to describe what people were getting themselves into, and let them decide if they would embark or not. I also felt the title hinted there must be something more here since it kinda gives the whole movie away.

But yes—the title got people’s attention. They usually wanted to know more. I had a lot of conceptual designs and storyboards to reveal some of the vision, and that helped a lot to let people know there was more going on than just a shocking title. If someone read the script, that was always the dividing line. One out of twenty people would want to be a part of it. That one out of twenty was always someone really, really special. Sometimes they’d be one of my all-time heroes. And that told me this was a story worth telling.

BD: How did the World Premiere go, at the Montreal Fantasia Film Festival? I could tell you were very nervous.

Robert Krzykowski during the Q&A session after the World Premiere of THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT at The Montreal Fantasia Film Festival. (Photo by Julie Delisle)

BOB K: I was nervous. I don’t enjoy being in front of lots of people, and I’m not always eloquent on the fly. That said, the audience was so alive, boisterous, and receptive. The Festival heads were lovely and supportive. When you write a script, you try to envision how it might interact with an audience. You try to track, predict, and surprise their emotional responses from page-to-page. At Fantasia, that audience was a dream version of those hopes. I know the creative team in that packed theater felt likewise. It was a special moment, being there. I won’t forget it.

Sam Elliott facing a capacity crowd at the World Premiere of THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT at the Montreal Fantasia Film Festival (Photo by Julie Delisle)

BD: Congratulations on doing very well on Rotten Tomatoes. Looks like reviewers are praising, deservedly, the film. Is it already opening doors for future projects? What can we expect from you in the future?

BOB K: Thank you. If people are finding this well, that makes me happy. It’s theirs now. I will shortly fade into the role of a bystander. And I’m happy about that. As a producer on the film, a lot of my business duties haven’t completely ended yet. When the dust settles, I look forward to getting home to Massachusetts and taking a moment to exhale. My writing desk is waiting for me, and I’m excited to return to a bit of normalcy, and figure it all out. For now, I’m grateful for the chance to talk about the film with you, and I look forward to further adventures—whatever that may be.

BD: Thank you so much for your time and generosity in this interview, and looking forward to your next project.

Sam Elliott during the Q&A session after the World Premiere of THE MAN WHO KILLED HITLER AND THEN THE BIGFOOT at The Montreal Fantasia Film Festival. (Photo by Julie Delisle)

The movie game with SAM ELLIOTT

At the start of our interview in Fantasia's Green Room, I took a few minutes to quizz Sam Elliott on some of his films, asking him for the fist thing that came to his mind when I say the title of one of his many films. A silly exercise made by someone who was unprepared, but he played along.

BRAIN DEAD: BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID.

SE: My wife, Katherine.

BD: Yes. But you didn’t meet her on that film, did you?

SE: No I didn’t. I was a contract player at Fox when I made the film. I had one line in the scene I was in, I was a shadow on the wall. Then I met Katherine ten years later as we starred in a film in a couple of scenes together.

BD: EVEL KNIEVEL.

SE: Lucky. I was lucky that it didn’t sell. It was a pilot for a show. It ended up being, you know…But I did get to meet Evel Knievel, which was a trip.

BD: He was an amazing character.

SE: He is. He was.

BD: Of course: ROAD HOUSE.

SE: Patrick Swayze. That’s the first thing that comes to mind.

BD: How was it working on that film?

SE: It was fun. You know that film was like the ultimate male fantasy. (Laughter) I think more guys talk about that movie than anything I have ever done. That and TOMBSTONE. It was a lot of fun but also a lot of work, you know. The fights were a lot of work. We had a two-time World Champion kickboxer, Billy The Jet, who trained us and worked with us every day while we were in production. Did a lot of fighting. I remember the biggest fight was on the last day of the shoot for me. I remember the next morning barely being able to open my eyes. I was not ready to move anywhere. It was …painful. I wasn’t full on fighting, but we were taking body blows and that kind of stuff, there was no way to avoid it when you’re doing those kind of fights. A lot of work, but a lot of fun.

BD: HULK.

SE: Ang Lee. The good fortune to be able to work with Ang Lee.

BD: Too bad they didn’t stay with you when they did…(replace him with William Hurt in the follow-up THE INCREDIBLE HULK)

SE: They didn’t. But the movie wasn’t as successful as the first, so…Don’t mess with it. And they didn’t have Ang Lee the second time either.

BD: GHOST RIDER.

SE: Wow. Australia. We got to shoot down in Australia. You know it was a lot of fun. It was very much like the kind of film we’re here to promote.

The author, hoping in vain his facial hair can one day be as legendary as Sam Elliott's. (Photo by King Wei Chu)

Search This Blog

Brain Dead and Loving it!