Michael McCraken on the film's makeups

One of the interesting side aspects that came from the Clemens/Yellin lawsuit against Spielberg and MGM were the under oath depositions given by various crew members. Here, makeup artist Michael McCraken, who worked for Craig Reardon on the film, discusses his work on the face peeling, closet mouth, and corpse sequences. One of the allegations in the lawsuit was that the "face ripping" scene was "stolen" from the Clemens/Yellin "Housebound" treatment, but as can be seen in this 1985 deposition transcript, we find that actually McCraken came up with the face ripping idea on the set, on his own, and it wasn't even in the Spielberg/Grais/Victor script.






  































 

The Unused Novelization

So, looking at Ebay one day I came across this listing:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/RARE-POLTERGEIST-UNCORRECTED-PAGE-PROOFS-WARNER-BOOKS-/190572830216?pt=Antiquarian_Collectible&hash=item2c5f069e08

LISTED IS WHAT I THINK IS A VERY RARE FIND
UNCORRECTED PAGE PROOFS
POLTERGEIST
BY WARNER BOOKS
WARNER BOOKS EDITION
COPYRIGHT 1982 BY AMBLIN ENTERPRICES, INC.
FIRST PRINTING: MAY, 1982
10987654321
301 NUMBERED PAGES
SOFTCOVER BLANK SPINE
HAS A STICKER OVER INSIDE CREDITS AND LOOKS TO HAVE HAD A STICKER OVER THE OUTSIDE COVER CREDITS.
THEY READS A NOVEL BY JOE HALDEMAN
 BASED ON A STORY BY  STEVEN SPIELBERG
WITH A SCREENPLAY BY  STEVEN SPEILBERG,
 MARK VICTOR & MICHAEL GRAIS
BUT THE INSIDE COVER STICKER READS A NOVEL BY JAMES KAHN THEN THE SAME INFO.
IT SEEMS THESE UNCORRECTED PROOFS ARE REALLY RARE SO MY PRICE MAY BE WAY OUT OF LINE OR WAY TO CHEAP.  IF IT IS TOO CHEAP THEN BY THIS ITEM AND DO NOT COMPLAIN. IF IT IS TOO HIGH SUBMIT A FAIR OFFER. I WILL GET BACK WITH YOU ON IT. I COULD NOT FIND ANY COMPARABLE ITEM TO SET A FAIR PRICE SO PLEASE UNDERSTAND MY SIDE OF THE PRICE. THANKS
BOOK SIZE IS 6 3/4" X 4 1/4" x 11/16TH THICK.
CONDITION: VERY GOOD +
 ITEM HAS GLUE RESIDUE FROM THE PAPER STICK ON LABELS THE PRINTER OR OTHERS PUT ON( REMEMBER ON OF THOSE IS GONE REVEALING THE FIRST ERROR) OTHERWISE I WOULD CONSIDER THIS ITEM LIKE NEW.
**********************

Joe Haldeman? I did some research online and eventually found his site. Turns out he's a sci-fi writer and professor at MIT. On his web site, he outlined how he got the job.
From:
http://home.earthlink.net/~haldeman/biolong.html
My previous agent, Kirby McCauley, was a good friend, too, but like a lot of us he's impressed by famous people. Steven Spielberg called him up and asked for me to write the novelization of Poltergeist. Kirby called me at Michigan State University, where I was doing a week of teaching in the Clarion Writers' Workshop, and told me to get my ass to Los Angeles. I did wait two days to finish my week, but then, since I'm also impressed by famous people, paid an arm and a leg to get an instant flight to LA.
It was odd from the beginning. I'm hard of hearing, like most ex-demolition engineers, and when I was introduced to Spielberg I didn't catch his name. I didn't know what he looked like, so I thought some flunky was leading me around, explaining the various sets. He seemed well informed, but was reasonably modest in demeanor, and I thought he was some kind of unit director or continuity person. When we went back to his office, I realized I'd spent an hour with the great man himself.
I gave them a tentative okay and they gave me the script. It was absolutely appalling. Spielberg had cobbled it together with a couple of friends during a Writers' Guild strike. [*David's note: This is incorrect; see my note below].But it was good money for the time, and I agreed to their conditions: send them a chapter a week, along with an outline of the next chapter. Spielberg's assistants Kathy Kennedy and Frank Marshall would handle the project, which pleased me. They were both super people, Hollywood energy and East Coast manners.
What eventually happened was a funny-in- retrospect disaster. I'd been up-front with Frank and Kathy about my lack of regard for the script, and so my notes that went along with each week's chapter were not exactly reverent. About halfway through the movie there's an awful scene where the young boy Robbie wakes up in the middle of the night and there's a terrible storm, actually a tornado. He walks hypnotized down the hall toward a shattered window. Outside the window is a huge old tree that has a slippery red mouth full of teeth, a vagina dentata that for some reason he seeks. His dad saves him from the mean old thing and nobody else in the nieghborhood notices that there has been a tornado. What was going on here was that Spielberg had constructed a $1.5 million special-effects tree, and by god it was going to be used in the movie no matter what. But I wrote to Kathy that there was no way I could shoehorn that kind of silliness into a novel. "I'm sure it will work in the movie," I told her diplomatically, "but in cold black type it sucks eggs."
She evidently agreed -- or more likely, didn't care one way or the other -- but the week after I finished the book, Spielberg got around to sorting through the memoes and, of course, took offense. I got a panicky message on my answering machine from my agent: "You told Steven Spielberg he sucks eggs?" -- and Spielberg kicked me off the project and hired another, faster, writer. I've never read that book, either.
(My version of Poltergeist did get printed into bound galleys before Spielberg killed it; I've signed two or three of them for collectors. My most rare book, by a couple of orders of magnitude. Possibly not my worst.)
I suspect that Spielberg had heard of my name through his film-school buddy George Lucas. I'd worked with George a year or two before, both of us advisors to Walt Disney's Imagineering outfit, while they were planning the Epcot theme park, or themeless park, in Orlando.
David's Note:  After doing a bit of research into the timing of the 1981 Writer's Guild Strike, I think Mr. Haldeman may have actually misremembered slightly the sequence of events. The WGA strike did not begin until April 11, 1981, but the first draft of the script was dated February, 1981, with some revisions (the last five pages) dated March 4, 1981. It's more likely that the "cobbling together" of the script that Haldeman mentions was actually in anticipation of the WGA strike, since most of Hollywood knew the strike would be coming sometime that spring. Many production companies were trying to stockpile scripts in case the strike actually happened (it ended up lasting for just over three months-13 weeks- ending in July of 1981).

"Poltergeist" began shooting on Monday, May 11, 1981.

It is possible that slight page revisions were made "on the fly" during shooting, while the strike was still going on. Michael Grais and Mark Victor, in the E! True Hollywood Story documentary, do mention picketing outside MGM with the union while the movie they had co-written was shooting inside. They say that at one point Spielberg was able to sneak them inside so they could watch some of the filming, and then they came back out and re-joined the picket line.

Finally, check out this excerpt from a June 15, 1981 "Newsweek" article about Spielberg:
He has written and will be executive producer of the horror film "Poltergeist," which Tobe Hooper ("The Texas Chain Saw Massacre") is directing. It is a script written in seven days under the pressure of the imminent Writers Guild strike ("and on the eighth day I rested," he laughs). And he will finally make the "little film" he has threatened for years, an independently financed $9 million movie cast entirely with children under 14 which will start shooting in August, called "ET" ("but don't think that stands for extraterrestrial"). He is also hoping to do an updated remake of the '40s love story "A Guy Named Joe." called "Always," and he may very well direct the fourth "Star Wars" episode. "The future 'Star Wars' will be much more experimental and intellectually interesting," he predicts.

The Script's Development

The Script's Development (Page 1 of 2)

Perhaps not as well known as the controversy over who really directed the film, the story of how the script came to be written is equally fascinating. Contradictions, accusations, rumors, and incomplete information abounds. The official story goes something like this: "Poltergeist" and "E.T." began originally as "Night Skies," which was to be the sequel to "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" at Columbia Pictures. Steven Spielberg had the idea of a farm family who is terrorized by a group of evil aliens, with one of the aliens who becomes friendly with one of the family's children. A script was written by John Sayles, and an SFX artist even began work on the alien creatures. Columbia later decided they didn't want the project, so Spielberg pitched it to MGM. He would produce, and find someone else to direct. At first Spielberg offered "Night Skies" to Tobe Hooper, but Hooper felt the alien aspect wasn't really his thing, telling Spielberg he'd like to do a ghost story instead. Spielberg, perhaps (like Hooper) influenced by the classic film "The Haunting" (as well as his own 1972 TV movie "Something Evil") agreed with the idea.

Hooper claims to have pitched Spielberg on an idea he had been developing off and on for the past few years at Universal.  He'd happened to get the old office of director Robert Wise, who made "The Haunting." Hooper found a book about poltergeists in Wise's desk, and thought the idea would make a good movie. According to Hooper, initially he worked with William Friedkin to try to get Universal interested in the project. The idea was to use the studio's surround sound process for the poltergeist audio effects.  Hooper and Spielberg collaborated by mail on a treatment while Spielberg was shooting "Raiders of the Lost Ark." Hooper claims to have come up with the idea of a family situation, people who were next door neighbors to a cemetery, but that his version didn't have an ending. In a "Fangoria" interview, Hooper stated that the idea of the ghosts kidnapping Carol Anne didn't come until late in the development process, and that the idea was both his and Steven's. 

Spielberg's 11 page treatment, then called "Night Time," was dated March 31, 1980. This treatment did not list Tobe Hooper as co-writer (though Hooper and frequent Spielberg collaborators Frank Marshall and Kathleen Kennedy seem to have offered some input, such as Kennedy suggesting that Spielberg include a scene in which blood pours from a bathroom faucet). Spielberg further revised this draft over the next five months, adding 15 pages of amendments by August 18, 1980, and then a further 5 pages on August 23, 1980. By this time, the story was called "It's Night Time."

Elements of the story that were there from the very beginning included the Freelings, the suburban setting, the TV set, the dead bodies in the newly dug pool, Tangina (called "Tagina" in the treatment), and the paranormal researchers. Things that didn't make it into the finished script included the neighbors turning against the Freelings, the family being composed of four kids instead of three, and the bodies under the house actually being the bodies of white settlers killed in the early 1800s by Indians. The amendments to the treatment changed this to a cemetery that had the headstones relocated but not the bodies.

Elements NOT in the treatment at all were: the tree, the clown, the house imploding, bodies exploding up from under the house and yard, toys floating around the bedroom, and the closet turning into a mouth and sucking things in. And in this early version, Carol Anne is never "kidnapped" by the ghosts (rather, she gets possessed by one of them; the family then flees the house, leaving her behind).

First Spielberg approached Stephen King to write the script, but things did not work out. According to author John Baxter in his biography of Spielberg:

They had an amiable lunch, after which King departed for England, leaving his publisher to negotiate a deal on his behalf. Doubleday, King says, 'asked this incredible amount of money to do the screenplay. This is for somebody who had never done a screenplay that had been produced.' MGM-and Spielberg-refused to pay it. 'I got a letter from Spielberg saying he was really unhappy that it turned out this way,' he told the sf and fantasy film journal 'Cinefantastique.' 'Really, as far as writing, it would have been the experience of working with him and watching him work-I could've used that. But in the end, I would've been hired help.'

Spielberg then met with co-writers Michael Grais and Mark Victor about possibly writing a remake of "A Guy Named Joe" (Spielberg would later do this as "Always" in 1989, without Grais and Victor). Grais and Victor were more interested in Steven's ghost story, however, and soon they got the job of turning the "It's Night Time" treatment into a full length screenplay. According to Grais in a 2012 interview with "Rue Morgue" magazine:

"Spielberg had read two scripts that I wrote with my ex-partner [Mark Victor]. 'Death Hunt,' which was a tough adventure drama based on a true manhunt in Canada during the depression, and a multi-character comedy about air traffic controllers called 'Turn Left or Die.' He said the combination of tough action and character development in 'Death Hunt' and the humor of 'Turn Left or Die' convinced him that we were right for the project."

In describing "It's Night Time," Grais went on to say:

"Steven's treatment was more a series of ideas and possible scenes. His idea of setting the story-in typical Spielberg fashion-in the suburbs was unique, as was his idea of the ghosts coming out of the TV. Ideas were evolving and we were doing research into ghost catchers, hauntings, etc., and watching horror movies. Tobe's 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre' was the scariest film I'd ever seen up until that point in time. I thought 'Whoa, Spielberg must want to go hardcore horror on this one.' In order to make this film really different-a la Tobe Hooper-we had to kill many of the family members! Spielberg recoiled at that idea but said we could pick one person to die and we said, 'Carol Anne.' He told us, smiling, we were sick but to proceed. We didn't kill her obviously and this solution to killing her-having her disappear into another dimension-came about in conversations with Spielberg."

It's unclear whether the Spielberg- suggested change to her getting kidnapped was really added by Grais and Victor in one of their later drafts, or added by Spielberg personally when he re-wrote their draft himself (more likely). This plot device idea would raise suspicions that Spielberg had been heavily influenced by Richard Matheson's short story and later "Twilight Zone" episode "Little Girl Lost." In fact, in a 1982 interview with "Twilight Zone" magazine, Matheson stated that Spielberg had once shown an interest in adapting that story as a film. It would later be rumored (but not confirmed) that Matheson was hired to write the "Twilight Zone" movie (and given a percentage of that film's box office) partly in an effort to head off any potential suit over "Poltergeist." For more on "Little Girl Lost," see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Girl_Lost_%28The_Twilight_Zone%29. In a 2011 interview with AICN, Matheson was asked:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/51519

AICN: Getting back to HELL HOUSE, which I think is an incredibly influential book in terms of the way it comes at the haunted house story with elements of science and parapsychology. These elements were then worked into films like POLTERGEIST, THE ENTITY, all the way up to INSIDIOUS, which came out this year. How do you feel when you see something like POLTERGEIST, which is so clearly influenced by your work?

Matheson: Well, POLTERGEIST was inspired by one of mine, and I never got credit for it. I had one of those old videos of THE TWILIGHT ZONE episode [“Little Girl Lost”] of the little girl that goes into the fourth dimension through the wall of her bedroom. They sort of used that idea and made their own concept of it.


....................

AICN: So all these years later, and here REAL STEEL is executive produced by Steven Spielberg, whose career was partially launched by DUEL.

Matheson: Well, I don’t even know if using “Little Girl Lost,” and kind of taking some of it for POLTERGEIST… god, he must have felt guilty or something. Because he hired me as the creative consultant on AMAZING STORIES, and I didn’t do too well on that. (Laughs) I rejected two of his stories. I’m not too political when it comes to this kind of thing. If I don’t like something, I don’t like it, I don’t care who did it.
But he called me and sent me a copy of the script for REEL STEEL, although as I recall it was not the same as it was in the movie. He asked me “Does it resemble your script for STEEL?” It did, and I told him so. So then they paid me money for it, which they probably wouldn’t have done otherwise.

AICN: Good answer.

Matheson: Yeah, I have an odd relationship with Steven.....But we have always had a very amiable relationship. I can remember sitting with him when he had an office at Metro. I remember sitting with him in this big office; all of the drapes were drawn, and it was sort of dark in there, and I was telling him he ought to meditate. At the time I was into transcendental meditation, and I said, “You ought to meditate.” He said, “This is my meditation.” Which was very nice of him to say. It’s a positive relationship, no doubt. God knows the man has talent.
 

In addition, in a 1982 "Cinefantastique" article, it was speculated that Spielberg may have also been influenced by another, lesser known Matheson short story called "Through Channels," in which a hysterical teenage boy details how his family was killed by a group of creatures which emerged from the family's television set.

As to who added the "monster tree" element of the story, according to Grais:

"The tree grabbing Robbie is based on an incident that happened to me when I was a small boy and woke up in a storm in our house. Everybody was gone-parents out and sisters out on dates. I was sitting on the landing, on the second floor of the house on the stairs, when lightning struck the tree in our yard. A huge branch crashed through the window close to where I was seated."

According to Spielberg's sister Sue, when interviewed in the E! True Hollywood Story documentary "The Curse of Poltergeist," Spielberg was also supposedly scared of old trees and clowns when he was growing up in suburban Scottsdale, Arizona.  

Ultimately, Spielberg was unsatisfied with the Victor/Grais draft. Not only did it feature the death of Carol Anne, it was extremely violent in general (Diane is graphically "ghost raped" while being drug across the bedroom ceiling, Dana gets trapped in a bathtub full of blood, and the Freeling's neighbor Ben Tuthill gets his head crushed by the family's station wagon as they flee at the end). Finally, over a seven day period (after the film had already been scheduled for production and as a Writer's Guild strike loomed), Spielberg did/oversaw a wholesale re-write, churning out over 100 pages with the help of Kathleen Kennedy and Frank Marshall, who moved into his house with him because he didn't want to be alone as he wrote. Each morning he'd read what he'd written back to them, and then they'd offer their ideas and feedback.Tobe Hooper also "hung around" at Spielberg's house as that draft was being worked on, offering his input as well. Spielberg would later claim in interviews (such as with Michael Ventura in the Los Angeles Weekly, July 11-17, 1982 edition) that he wrote this draft of the script by himself. However, according to Bob Martin, the original editor of "Fangoria" magazine, sources on Spielberg's payroll alleged that potentially "up to 8" uncredited ghost writers took a crack at the script at various points after Victor/Grais turned in their version.

According to a source of mine, one of those uncredited writers (likely helping out during that 7 day period) was Spielberg's friend Matthew Robbins, who wrote "The Sugarland Express" and also did uncredited work on "Close Encounters." It's also probable that the longtime writing partner of Robbins, Hal Barwood, contributed as well (in at least a minimal way, if not more). Evidence for this would seem to be backed up by a statement of author Joe Haldeman, who wrote an unused version of the film's novelization:

"I gave them [Spielberg, Frank Marshall and Kathy Kennedy] a tentative okay and they gave me the script. It was absolutely appalling. Spielberg had cobbled it together with a couple of friends [right before] a Writers' Guild strike."

This official "revised first draft" of "It's Night Time" was dated February 9, 1981, and was renamed "Poltergeist." By this point, added to the script was Carol Anne's abduction into another dimension, the change of the male Dr. Lesh character to a woman, and the monologues of Lesh and Tangina about the nature of "The Light," " the Beast," and why the ghosts wanted Carol Anne and her "life force." The film began shooting three months later.

In 1982, a young actor/writer named Paul Clemens (who starred in "The Beast Within," "Death in Canaan" and "Promises in the Dark") and his co-writer Bennett Michael Yellin would allege that in January of 1980, they submitted, via their agent, a script treatment called "Housebound" to Spielberg's production company, Amblin' (which at the time was located on the MGM lot). Spielberg's office would deny ever receiving the manuscript. Clemens had auditioned (with Debra Winger) for Spielberg on "1941," but did not get the role. Clemens liked Spielberg, and admired his movies. "Housebound" had been registered with the Writer's Guild West on September 7, 1979. It was a haunted house story about a family (consisting of a mother, father, older daughter, middle son and young daughter) who live in a strange old house which traps the family. The youngest daughter ends up being kidnapped by the house, and hidden somewhere inside it. As the family attempt to get her back, they can hear her voice calling out somewhere within the house for help. It's discovered that the home was built on top of a swamp where people had died under mysterious circumstances, and at the climax, bodies of those who drowned in the swamp come crashing up from beneath the home's floorboards. Also part of the treatment were a "living" tree that is found inside an upstairs bedroom (which attacks the father), and another room that takes on a "throat like" appearance (with a "tongue") as it attempts to suck in and "swallow" things from outside the room (featuring "saliva" dripping from around the edges of the door frame and an interior of smooth, glistening pink flesh). Clemens and Yellin said they never heard anything back from anyone at Spielberg's office after their treatment was submitted.

In late 1981, Clemens first became aware of the similarities between "Housebound" and "Poltergeist" while at a party at the home of "Alien" producer Ronald Shusett. He'd been in conversation with one of the "Poltergeist" actors, who had just completed shooting on the film, as Clemens had also just finished his horror film "The Beast Within." Clemens had become friends with another "Poltergeist" actor previously-Dominique Dunne-since the two of them had auditioned together on "Ordinary People."  As Clemens and the other "Poltergeist" actor (not Dominique) traded stories, Clemens realized with surprise that the storyline of "Poltergeist" seemed to share multiple similarities to "Housebound."  He decided to obtain a copy of the "Poltergeist" script as soon as possible. Once he and Bennett Yellin read it, they got it to Clemens' attorney/business-manager, and then it quickly found its way to the desk of the barrister/solicitor copyright infringement specialist team (that became their lawyers on the case). The legal team agreed to take their case on a contingency basis. The $37 million suit would be filed in federal Court on Spring Street in downtown Los Angeles several months after the film's release. The defendants named included Steven Spielberg, MGM/UA, Lucasfilm (since ILM designed the visual effects) and Warner Books (which published the novelization of the script).

Here's an article excerpt from the November-December 1982 issue of "Cinefantastique", written by Donald Moore:

"We think there's clear story misappropriation," said Clemens' and Yellin's attorney, Derrick Fisher. "Spielberg might defend his story against copyright infringement by claiming it was an 'independent creation.' Well, you can have independent creation in maybe one of these plot elements, but there are so many of them which are almost identical." In 1981, Clemens had obtained a first draft copy of the Poltergeist script, but was counseled by his attorney to wait and see what similarities remained in the finished movie. The first draft had prompted author/director Frank DeFelitta to protest a scene he felt was lifted from his film "The Entity" (to be released by 20th Century Fox next spring) in which a mother is literally raped by a ghost. In that case, the script was changed. The plaintiffs have already lined up two expert witnesses, magazine editor Forrest J. Ackerman and author Ray Bradbury, who have agreed to go over each story and render their own professional opinions as to similarities in plot and structure. Ackerman also served for the defense in the Battlestar Galactica vs. Star Wars lawsuit, and Bradbury read Clemens' original story when asked back in 1979 for his literary advice. Clemens insists he has no personal animosity towards Steven Spielberg. "I like Spielberg," he said. "I've met him twice and he was enourmously gracious to me. I love his films. This is just a specific case. I'm not out to 'get' Spielberg. But look at the evidence! He's the only person we sent this script to and he makes this movie."

Here's an excerpt from "Fangoria" Issue #24:

It is not the policy of Spielberg or his offices to comment directly on such lawsuits. But, as one Spielberg associate said, "It is amazing to see the amount of material that gets dumped on the man every day. It's put into mail sacks-unopened-and sent to the Writer's Guild [Presumably, the Writer's Guild sees that submissions made by their members are returned] It's something the man has to do to protect himself, because every time a film makes over $100 million, these people come out of the woodwork."
"Certainly that would not be the case with an agented manuscript," says Mark Kalisch, one of Clemens' attorneys in the case, and Paul's agent [Tom Korman of Korman Contemporary Artists] only sent the script to one person, and that was Spielberg."
"I was raised around the film business," says Clemens, whose mother is actress Eleanor Parker, "so I have a pretty good idea of how things work. I'm going ahead with this with some reluctance; I did have to consider the possibility of being blacklisted. And I've always been a great admirer of most of Spielberg's work-I still admire his work." 

 

  "Housebound" was not a script in the usual sense but rather a script-length treatment much in the same format as Kubrick's original draft of "Full Metal Jacket." What the plaintiffs in the case would come to believe (as the case dragged on for four years) was that an intern or other lower level "ghostwriter" employee at Amblin' read the treatment, and then jotted down ideas from it which were then presented to the "Poltergeist" creative team as their own (the intern/ghostwriter's) contribution. It was not believed that Spielberg himself "stole" or authorized the theft of the material; he was simply too busy a man to be reading spec submissions from then unknown writers. What remains unclear is exactly when these alleged unauthorized "borrowings" took place, if they in fact happened. It would eventually be claimed that there were up to 67 alleged similarities between "Housebound" and the various early drafts (not just the final draft) of "Poltergeist."

In addition, "Housebound' didn't have a number of elements: the TV, a character like "Tangina," the clown, the house imploding, or the toys flying around the room, so those elements were original to "Poltergeist." Contrary to "Little Girl Lost," in "Housebound" the kidnapped little girl was literally INSIDE the house, rather than in another dimension.  But in "Housebound" people could hear her from time to time as they were desperately trying to locate her (it was as though the house itself had devoured/abducted her and was hiding her away as bait as it then played games with the other characters trapped inside it).

Article continues here:
www.poltergeist.poltergeistIII.com/wrote2.html

Below, some scans of the film's script:

 

 

 

 

 The Script's Development (Page 2 of 2)
Over the course of the four year period, many days of deposition testimony were given by the plaintiffs, Steven Spielberg, Kathleen Kennedy, Frank Marshall, Tobe Hooper and Stephen King and experts retained by all parties.

According to the official Court Reporter's Transcript of Proceedings, dated March 25, 1985, the plaintiff's lead attorney Mark Kalisch argued this before Federal District Judge Consuelo B. Marshall (my notes are in BOLD):

"Compare the earlier drafts to 'Housebound.' Don't just look at 'Poltergeist' in its final version. What other similarities are there in the earlier drafts? Well, there are dozens of them. There is the knife being used to free the boy from the tree. There is the closet which was located in the hall. There is the fact that Carol Anne was killed in the closet just like in 'Housebound,' and that disappears. [Although, in "Housebound" it's the mother who dies in the closet, not "Lucky," the little girl] There is the ant eating a light toque. There is the deep organic well. There is the house as a living entity. There is the fact that it was told that the inhabitants of the house should not let the beast know that it scares you. There is the use of the words 'the beasts.' There is the bath scene, the blood from the faucet, which later on didn't occur. There is the fact that one of the inhabitants of the house was pinned in the chair and flew across the room. That was in an earlier draft and it didn't occur in the final version."

"The fact that the tree prevents the family from leaving. The fact that the animal [E. Buzz, apparently] was pronounced dead in the earlier versions. The fact that night lamps are hurtling through the air; et cetera, et cetera. These similarities between early drafts of 'Poltergeist' and 'Housebound' are circumstantial evidence that is going to go before the jury to determine whether or not there was access. The jury is going to determine whether it is more likely than not that that script was sent by [Clemens' agent] Korman via [Korman's secretary] Halchester and via the 'go-fers' to Spielberg and to [Kathleen] Kennedy. They are either going to believe that it was sent, and they are either going to disbelieve Kennedy or they are not. They are either going to take the circumstantial evidence of access into consideration and come to the conclusion that there is access, or they are not. That is the province of the jury."

In response, the Defendants' attorney, Louis Petrich, argued:

"The question that Mr. Kalisch now knows apparently that Mr. Korman sent the transcript by messenger, he told your Honor that this was so. But as the record shows, Mr. Korman at his deposition could not remember which. All he knows is that he did what his client told him. The only person in the universe, that he thinks he submitted it to, was my client [Spielberg]. And yet, he cannot remember how it was sent, whether it was sent to the right place and of course, we put on evidence to show that even if it was sent, it would not have been accepted, because there was a policy at the time of not accepting unsolicited transcripts of plays or treatments. This is a case where none of the presumptions about due sending come into effect, because the person who was in charge can't say whether he sent it or where he sent it. And at his deposition he guessed twice and guessed wrong both times as to where he should have sent it."
Over a year after the particular court proceeding exchanges above, a Cinefantastique article about "Poltergeist II" contained a small update on the case:

A lawsuit pending against Steven Spielberg and POLTERGEIST's co-writers could, meanwhile, prove more than tiresome. Spielberg and associates still stand accused of having appropriated substantial portions of a script written by actor Paul Clemens and Bennet Michael Yellin. The script, they maintain, had been forwarded to Spielberg's office in January 1980. Its protagonists underwent a fate which would sound more than vaguely familiar in the context of POLTERGEIST. The case could reach the courts during the next few months, Clemens told us, although he's been instructed by his lawyers not to discuss the case. MGM, the distributor of POLTERGEIST II, also had no comment on how the outcome of the case could affect their release.

The plaintiffs had a respected, award-winning genre writer lined up to be an expert witness should the case go to trial. The defendants had an even more well-known award-winning genre writer prepared to testify on their behalf. Forrest Ackerman was never going to be an expert witness in the trial, but was only a consultant -- along with Ray Bradbury -- earlier on in the four year journey toward a court-date.

By the time the case was set for trial in Federal Court later that year (1986), it was agreed that even though they lacked a crucial messenger receipt proving that "Housebound" had been delivered to Amblin' (thus making "access" the weak link in their case), the plaintiffs believed that their case was still strong enough (based solely on the claimed points of similarity), that they stood a 50/50 chance of winning. The Defendants argued both that there was no proof the treatment had ever been delivered to the Amblin' offices, and that the alleged similarities between the two works did not rise to the standard of copyright infringement under the law.

On September 17, 1986, Judge Marshall delivered her Order for Partial Summary Judgment:

1. The motion by defendants for an order specifying certain facts to be without controversy is granted insofar as the Court finds that there is no fragmented literal similarity between plaintiffs' work "HOUSEBOUND" and the motion picture and novel "POLTERGEIST."

2. The remainder of the motion is denied because there are genuine issues of material fact.
Shortly after this date, the case was set to go to trial. Possibly due in part to the Judge's second finding above, the plaintiffs received a settlement offer just three days before the trial was to begin. The terms of the settlement were requested by the defendants and agreed upon by the plaintiffs to remain confidential.

A side note: Several years ago, an unknown person claimed on the (now closed) Spielbergfilms.com message board that the suit was settled for a "not particularly large" sum of money (at least according to today's standards).
Another source told me:

"I did get to look at the similarities the plaintiffs said were stolen from their treatment, and I have to say, I was not impressed. Most of it looked like standard haunted house stuff to me, things it would be easy to dream up if you were writing a story in that genre. Spielberg struck me as a completely honest guy, and already on the roll he was on, why would he bother stealing something like that? Much easier just to pay them for the idea, if he saw it and wanted it that much. I also know the screenwriters, Mark Victor and Michael Grais, and can't imagine literary theft from them, either. If there was any crossover of ideas, it would have been with Richard Matheson's 'Twilight Zone' episode, 'Little Girl Lost' - but I don't think that notion was particularly original with him, either, and in any case I'm pretty sure Spielberg and Matheson were friends. The notion of 67 similarities is ridiculous, and even the seemingly significant similarities, like the little girl sucked into the house in a different plane, who everyone can hear but nobody can see, was conceived first by Matheson. So why isn't that theft by the plaintiffs from Matheson's idea? Because ideas emerge from our subconscious minds, which are influenced by cultural mythologies and stories and dreams. It's just not reasonable to go around suing people for coming up with similar manifestations of shadow archetypes."

However, in 1997, Robert "Bob" Martin, the original editor of "Fangoria" magazine, made a post on the old Usenet bulletin board. In the post, he discussed, jokingly, how he knew enough to write a "dark side of Spielberg" book. After discussing the "Twilight Zone" film, he moved on to "Poltergeist:"

Another cool chapter would be about the committee of eight writers who wrote -- and, for many scenes, outright *stole* from multiple sources -- the Poltergeist script credited to Spielberg and two writers. MGM even shut down production on a TV movie because there was a set-piece, involving a ghostly hand emerging from a television screen, that the writing committee wished to incorporate into the Poltergeist script, but other appropriations were not so above-board. Spielberg was unaware that his "ghost writers" had sticky fingers until the lawsuits hit. Veteran fantasy writer Richard Matheson and actor/screenwriter Paul Clemens were paid off. Spielberg has, wisely enough, not taken a bogus writing credit since. (Another chapter might play compare and contrast between Spielberg's many pronouncements on "artist's rights" and his role as 800-pound bear producer on other director's films).

I eventually received an email from Robert Martin himself, in which he wished to clarify a few matters:

 

Hi. You indicate on your Poltergeist website that you were trying to contact me. I'm right here....My resentment of Spielberg is mainly fueled by circumstantial evidence causing me to believe that he and/or his people used the press (specifically Rolling Stone magazine) to give a PR lynching to John Landis. It so happens I recently outlined this beef with Spielberg in an imdb

post: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001361/board/thread/30986916?p=6&d=114429675#114429675

Paul Clemens confided in me about his case against Spielberg when I met him on the set of "The Beast Within." I never wrote about it in FANGORIA because I had established a policy of not treating the familiar stories about who stole what as news, since there were so many people writing to me about their "stolen" ideas, most of it baseless or trivial. I believed Clemens, but I didn't feel that was sufficient to make an exception. As a guy who grew up in Hollywood, Clemens knew how things go well enough that he wouldn't sue at the drop of a hat (Clemens himself pointed this out to me when we spoke about this).
When Tobe Hooper claimed to me that he was being shut out of creative credit for Poltergeist, I reported that in Fango because it *was* news. I never had it confirmed that Clemens was paid off, I heard it as a rumor. The case simply disappeared, which itself suggests that someone traded their silence for wads of cash.

I used the term "committee" loosely, in that there were never 8 people working on the script at once; but there were uncredited writers working on the script after Grais and Victor, after it had been scheduled for production (causing a great rush to get the script in shape; this is when I believe there were unauthorized borrowings). My source for this sort of info was a number of personal friends who were on Spielberg's payroll at the time, who spoke in confidence.

One fascinating aspect to me is the fact that a ghost-themed TV movie that MGM had in the can was never broadcast because some elements of the script were wanted for Poltergeist. My source for this named the TV movie in question, and I was able to confirm its existence and late-term cancellation.Since I never wrote about all this, I have no record of the name of that project. My best estimation of the number of writers on the script, total, is eight. This is not including Tobe, who told me flat-out that the basic story and concept were his. I don't discount Tobe as readily as everyone else in the world does, but I've despaired of convincing anyone else of his truthfulness.

You can quote me exactly on any of this, including the Usenet posting, but please be clear that I name no sources nor do I claim any high degree of reliability for these anonymous sources. But I nevertheless do believe I have a better grip on how Poltergeist was put together than the vast majority of people.

In conclusion, perhaps some things will never be known with certainty, especially regarding exactly who added which elements of the storyline from draft to draft. For example, if there really were up to eight uncredited writers who worked on the script after Grais and Victor (besides the previously mentioned Matthew Robbins and Hal Barwood) who were they? And what about the alleged MGM TV movie? Was it in fact filmed but never broadcast, or simply stopped in the writing stages? Many unanswered questions remain. One source, another uncredited writer for a different Spielberg film, told me:

"I will tell you.... you'll probably never trace the exact trail of the POLTERGEIST script - so much is said on the phone or in meetings that changes the scripts and different writers etc. - it would be very hard to get it right, and even the people involved decades later won't remember clearly."

And finally, as Tobe Hooper was quoted in a "Fangoria" interview with Bob Martin (when discussing the making of the film in general):

"'Poltergeist' will always be a tricky movie. A number of people who should have gotten credit, didn't get credit. There's a lot of magic and business mysticism connected with it. We're all still trying to figure this one out."

Memories of Zelda

Below are some email exchanges I had with Zelda's former publicist, Tyler St. Mark, soon after she passed away. You can visit his web site at www.stmark.com


******************************

Hi David,

 

Thank you for your thoughtful email.

 

Yes, indeed, I have many, many anecdotes about Zelda and both her film career and AIDS activism.   Along with producing the AIDS campaign, I was Zelda's publicist as well for several years and have many, many bittersweet memories of those times.

In particular, I was on the set of Poltergeist II several times and have some amusing stories from that particular film as well.

 

Below are a few rare photos I have shared this week...

 

Tyler St.Mark

www.stmark.com

 

 

Zelda and I during one of the many photo shoots for the "Mother Cares" campaign.  As I was the one

who found and championed her for the role of "Mother," she often jokingly referred to me as "Father."

 

A publicity photo of Zelda in her "Mother" wardrobe

 

Although most of the media recently featured another poster from the set, this

poster was actually the most popular and featured of all the safe sex posters.

 

 

Zelda receiving a special proclamation from the County of L.A.

 

I can tell you that, yes, Zelda was not too pleased at the time with the second film or its director.  From what I witnessed, Mr.Gibson was not a detail-oriented director and his "direction" of the film's cast consisted primarily of this:

"Alright, everybody, CONCENTRATE!"  He would repeat this before every scene and take--and it was really quite annoying. 

 

Also, from what I observed, he wasn't well-liked for reasons that I was never clear on.   Zelda was polite but aloof around him and, clearly, didn't care for him or his directing style.   Of course, it didn't help that some of her best scenes went onto the cutting room floor.  

 

One funny story:  I was on the set the day they filmed the underground cavern scene.   I walked among the numerous skeletons that littered the set during setups and, being a former emergency medical technician, I mentioned to Zelda that I thought that some of them appeared remarkably authentic.  "Are you sure they aren't real?," I joked.  Many months later, I heard that the set decorators had used real skeletons purchased from India because they were cheaper than making fake ones.

 

DAVID: Do you recall what scenes with her were cut? I was told by one of the editors that at least 15 minutes of various scenes were cut from the film during post production. Here is an excerpt from the shooting script that I did find, with the publicity still of the scene below:

EXT. GRAMMA JESS' HOUSE/FRONT YARD-SUNSET-DIANE, TANGINA

 

They walk together toward Tangina's car.

 

TANGINA

I want you to know something...I'm afraid. That's the real reason I haven't been here.

 

DIANE

I understand.

 

TANGINA

There's something else I feel you should know...The authorities are going to seal off the cavern..the day after tomorrow at noon...citing "health regulations."

 

Diane hugs Tangina.

 

DIANE

Maybe that'll end it all.

 

Tangina shrugs.

 

DIANE

I'll miss you.

 

TANGINA

God bless, child.

 

Tangina gets in her car and drives off, leaving Diane watching her, sadly.

TYLER: I don't recall all of the scenes now but one of them, as I do recall, involved a direct confrontation with the evil reverend played by Julian Beck.   Zelda was quite upset about it as she felt that was one of her best scenes.  (I never saw the scene nor was I there when it was filmed).  

 

I also recall early on that Zelda was very concerned that Julian was very ill at the time and, according to her, "probably terminal."  He died before the film completed, of course.

 

As far as the director, he simply came across like he didn't really know what he was doing and it was off-putting to the cast and crew.  His manner was brash, abrupt, pedantic, and seemingly insecure.  Combined with all of the other issues that hindered the production, including delays, actors' illness and death, the morale was extremely low on this production. Honestly, nobody looked like they were enjoying the process--including Zelda.

I later asked writer/producer Michael Grais about the deleted scene with Zelda and Julian. Here's what he told me:


Yes, I do remember something like that...it was a great scene. Sorry it didn't make it in.

************************

Another friend of Zelda's, Jack, who first met her while doing a play in 1984, shared the following information with me:

I met Zelda on May 27th 1984, my birthday. Her birthday is May 28th. She was doing a production of George Orwell's "1984" on stage in LA at the time. We became close friends from then on. I was NOT lucky to have known her. I was privileged.
I always called her Zelda Mae! "Hey there Zelda Mae! "Love you Zelda Mae!"

As the song from DREAMGIRLS says........Love you I do!

While I am not shocked [at her passing] I am still dazed. I sort of cannot believe it. Friends of over 25 years are hard to maintain. I miss her profoundly. She was one unique and fabulous woman.

[When I told Jack about how I saw Zelda at a "Poltergeist" screening but was a bit shy to approach her, he said:]


You should NEVER have been scared off by Zelda and her "ways" of dealing with fans! Are you male? Are you the slightest bit cute? hee hee! She would have responded with GLEE! Zelda LUVS her men! If you are a woman and got down on your knees to worship her? Ohhhhhhhhhh look out!

Anyway, I don't want to sound like a smart ass.

When I have time over the next week I will send you stories about Zelda and the whole POLTERGEIST phenom. I have to reflect. I was with her when she shot scenes up in the John Hancock Center  in Chicago. The whole "icy pool thing". I met Lara Flynn Boyle and the whole cast. That night when they shot the icy pool thing was interminable and Zelda and I left early to go to a restaurant for dinner across the street.

Short story.

Zelda LOVED a particular waiter in a private dining room in the Hotel next to where she was staying. We went there and she ordered Beef Wellington. When it arrived it was an individual serving of Wellington on a plate submerged in a lovely brown Cabernet sauce. Zelda took a knife and fork and sliced in. The knife hit the plate and the Cabernet sauce hit her face and chest with alarming velocity. She was covered.

The Owner/Hostess/Whatever noticed this and ran to get a cloth with club soda. When she got to Zelda she offered her assistance. Zelda said "The gravy got the best of me!" We both laughed but the snide Owner/Hostess/Whatever said........"DEAR that is a sauce!"

Without a beat Zelda said "Yes DEAR I know it is a sauce but it is BEHAVING like gravy!". Hilarity ensued.

More where that came from.



Since I used to be an actor and have been around famous people my entire life I am not a "fanboy" so to speak. I have never gotten that thrill of seeing or meeting a celeb like some folks do. Wellllllllll........maybe once. I met Julie Andrews at a party and damn near passed out! LOL!

I just haven't retained the small stuff that people are so entranced by. While I have many many stories about Zelda I am woefully ill equipped to give minutiae on topics like set visits and the like. I will do my best to fill in some gaps though. I have visited your websites and think you are a good egg. Smart and funny.

Here are a few remembrances:

When I went on the set of P3 and watched the filming of that icky pool scene it was just a "royalty tour" as we call it in the biz. Zelda wanted me to see her surroundings and to meet the cast as well as show me off as one of her "boyfriends". That sounds awful but oh so true. She also couldn't be around Gary Sherman enough. She just adored him and thought he would make her into a "real" movie star with a great role some day. Zelda was infatuated with Gary in a big way. Later she did POLTERGEIST: THE LEGACY for him. She told me that she did it to "elevate" the property for Gary.

I never met Heather O'Rourke. She was not involved with that scene that night. I understood that she was ill though. Zelda ADORED that child. When she passed away Zelda was inconsolable. It was sad and touching at the same time. Zelda is very good with children. She worked at Arena Stage in DC one year and actually adopted a boy that was in the cast!

Tobe Hooper! OMG! Zelda detested him. The "traffic cop" line that is attributed to her is as old as I am! Her actual line was as follows:

"Tobe Hooper? The only line that man is qualified to direct is 'Hello welcome to Arbys. Do you have any coupons?'". LMAO!

I vaguely remember a conversation with Zelda about P2 and Beatrice Straight. Beatrice was an Oscar winner and felt that POLTERGEIST was beneath her in the first place. P2 was out of the question. Zelda was thrilled to reprise her role as Tangina.

Brian Gibson! OMG! Zelda detested him. More on him later.

Zelda thought Geraldine Fitzgerald was a GODDESS! Zelda is hateful toward women. Mostly tall women. But she loved Geraldine.

As for Poltergeist IV? I heard a whisper about it many years ago. The script was said to be unfilmable. Something about reincarnation and Indians? I don't quite remember. I DO remember that there was not ONE star of the previous films that would sign on.

Zelda story:

Zelda got off a plane at Burbank airport in 1996. She was returning from Florida. She sat next to a "breathtaking" young man. She was all verklempt when relaying this story. She said, "Jack! That man was SOOOOOOOO beautiful I wanted to fuck him into unconciousness!" That's my Zelda!

God Bless and as Zelda always said...........CHEERS!

Interview with Oliver Robins

Photo by Keli Squires Taylor

In February of 2009, Oliver gave an excellent interview to the web site Iconsoffright.com. You can read that interview here:
http://iconsoffright.com/news/2009/02/fright_exclusive_interview_oli.html
There were a few other questions I had related to the "Poltergeist" sequels, and on July 31, 2009, Oliver responded. You can check out his latest movie "Man Overboard" at
http://manoverboardmovie.com/
and if you'd like to order autographed photos of Oliver, please visit
www.LadyLitz555.com 
Special thanks to Mike at AJW Celebrity Services for arranging this interview.

David: Even though you weren't in it, can you talk a bit about "Poltergeist III?"
Oliver:  I've never seen the movie, so I can not intelligently comment on the film.
David: Did MGM offer to reprise your role as "Robbie" in Poltergeist III? 
Oliver: At the time I was bogged down in prep school hell attempting to pass chemistry, so I was focused on my studies...  I had no time to act.  I'm not certain if I was offered a role because everyone knew my focus was my education, and then applying to USC Film School, my alma mater. 
[David's note: Here's a post someone made on the IMDB a while back that should be of interest:
I met Oliver today at the Chiller Theater convention in Parsippany, NJ. He is a super nice guy, very friendly. He talked with my friend and I for a long time.

We wound up talking about Poltergeist 3, and interestingly he has never seen it. He was actually asking us questions about the plot! He wanted to know how the movie explains the absence of his character, and the rest of the family. All he knew is that it takes place in a skyscraper, and there's a lot of mirror action. It was pretty funny! He said he wants to see it, but he just keeps putting it off all these years because he heard it wasn't very good. I agreed. He also said he was never approached to be in Part 3, and that he never believed in any "curse" of the Poltergeist movies. ]
David: Were you in contact with Heather O'Rourke while she was filming the movie in Chicago?
Oliver: No, I was not.
David: What are your thoughts on the film?
Oliver: I don't have any thoughts as I have not seen the film.
David: If MGM had made a "Poltergeist IV" instead of a remake, would you have been interested in accepting a role as an adult "Robbie" if the studio had decided to bring the Freeling family back?
Oliver: Hey, I'm open to all possibilities.  I love all aspects of filmmaking, acting included.
David: Regarding "Dana" not being in the second film because of the tragic murder of Ms. Dunne, do you recall whether there was ever a scene filmed in "Poltergeist II" where Dana being away at college was discussed? I know a scene was written in one of the earlier draft scripts, but I'm not sure if it made it into the actual shooting stage. 
Oliver: Not that I recall.
[David's note: After reading the final shooting script of P2, such a scene was not included)
David: Do you recall any other scenes shot for "Poltergeist I" or "II" but left out of the final cut? 
Oliver: I was nine years-old during the production so time has blurred my memory of the shooting script. 

David: Would you be interested in contributing to special edition DVD versions of the first two films at some point in the future, such as an audio commentary track, for example?
Oliver: I would love to give my insights into the making of the film if a special edition DVD was released -- it was such a fantastic experience which inspired me to become a writer-director.
**************
I'd like to thank Mr. Robins for taking the time to speak with me, and I wish him the best of luck with his new film.

Interview with Richard Lawson

Above, Richard Lawson ("Ryan," on the far right) looks into the children's bedroom at some poltergeist activity.
Recently I spoke with actor Richard Lawson, who played the parapsychologist Dr. Ryan Mitchell.
1. Can you talk a bit about how you got the role of "Ryan" in "Poltergeist," and what it was like working on set? What was it like working with all of the visual effects, and have you kept in contact with any of the cast/crew over the years?
Steven Spielberg saw me in a play called "Streamers" by David Rabe. It was opening night and the play was a huge success that night because we got three standing ovations. My character "Carlyle" was the antagonist in the play. He kills two people during the course of the evening. I was standing backstage talking to Jack Palance when over my shoulder I overheard someone say "You see Steven, he's not like the character". I turned around to see Steven Spielberg and his then wife, Amy Irving. Steven proceeded to confirm that he had no desire to meet me, because anyone who could play that part, must be like the character. He went on to say that it was one of the most powerful performances he had ever seen. And I was like a time bomb and that kept him nervous the entire evening. He thanked me for my performance and wished me well. That was in 1977. I finally had a chance to work for him in 1981 when we shot "Poltergeist".

It was really incredible working on the set because it was such a small cast and such an efficient crew. Everything was storyboarded, so you knew exactly what the day was going to be like. Steven is so prepared, that shooting the movie seems like the easy part.

Visual effects are interesting in that it's 100% imagination because there's nothing there. The actors are looking at a stick with a white tip on it so that everyone's focusing on the same point and everyone is playing something different. One person may be playing the "awe" of it, while someone else is playing the fear. My character was always fascinated and interested.

2. What was it like when you finally saw the film with an audience (at that point I'm sure you realized you were in a big hit!)?
I first saw the film in a screening before it was released. I knew it was going to be something special but I had no idea that it would be such a big hit.


3. In the novelization, there are some scenes which were apparently thought up by the writer James Khan, and others from the script, which were not in the finished film. Did you read this book? It's really good. Some of the differences are very interesting. For example, unlike the movie, it is Tangina who leads the paranormal investigators to the house. Ryan and Marty design this contraption to monitor her brain waves while she sleeps (she's been having bad dreams). With Dr. Lesh, they then set out driving and "follow" the signals emanating from the EEG readout, until they get to Cuesta Verde. Do you recall any scenes being shot which either involved your character or other scenes which didn't make it into the final film? On the trailer, there is a brief shot of Jobeth Williams saying "That thing is in there with my baby!" as well as Beatrice Straight looking at the monitors saying "There are hundreds." Both of these lines were cut out.
No, I didn't read the book and most of the things we shot as I recall made it into the film.

4. Regarding the sequels: Were you ever asked about appearing in "Poltergeist II"? Apparently Beatrice Straight's character Dr. Lesh was written into the script initially, but then she backed out and was replaced by Zelda. I think II would have been much better had they found some way to include Lesh, Ryan, and Marty. In addition, what did you think of II and III? Tobe Hooper once claimed that his and Spielberg's original idea for part II was to have the National Guard cordon off the neighborhood, while a scientific team is assembled to enter the flashing blue light which consumed the house. That sounds more interesting than what MGM ultimately came up with.
I was never contacted by anyone to do the sequel. I thought it was kind of strange but what are you going to do? :-)


5. If there is a fourth film ever made, would you consider appearing in it (assuming it was a good script)? There have been some rumors off and on that MGM was considering this. Original co-writer Michael Grais even has a title as being "in development" listed on his web site called "Poltergeist: In the Shadows."
Yes, I would consider doing a fourth film. Let's see what happens. Maybe this 25th anniversary will stimulate more interest.


6. Were you ever approached about appearing in the upcoming 25th Anniversary DVD release, and do you plan to see the movie in the theater again for the one night only showing?

I was interviewed along with everyone else. I haven't seen anything yet but I'm sure they'll be some kind of release. If you hear of anything let me know.

7. Any other interesting memories from the making of the film you'd like to share?
Just that it was a wonderful experience working on the film. Craig T. Nelson and I worked together twice after that. On a series called Chicago story and on his series "The District".


**********************************

I'd like to thank Mr. Lawson sincerely for taking the time to answer my questions. You can check out his web site at www.richardlawson.net
Also, here's some excerpts from a 2005 interview that Richard did with Larry King regarding a plane crash that he (Richard) survived:
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0505/23/lkl.01.html
KING: Wow.

Richard Lawson, TV and movie actor, who by the way is best known for a two-year stint as Lucas on ABC's "All My Children." What happened?

RICHARD LAWSON, SWITCHED SEATS, SURVIVED JET CRASH; PASSENGER IN ORIGINAL SEAT DIED: I was catching a U.S. Air flight 405 from La Guardia to Cleveland.

KING: When?

LAWSON: March 22nd, 1992. And I was going to -- I was doing "All My Children," but I was also working for the NBA Drug Education and Training Association, so I was going to Cleveland to have a meeting with the Cleveland Cavaliers. And I was trying to beat the snowstorm that was coming supposedly Monday morning.

So I left my house about 7:00, and the snowstorm hit. By the time I got to the airport, it was just a mess. And so got on the plane, had strong feelings about it.

KING: Plane took off, though?

LAWSON: Plane took off, going down the runway. I knew the plane was going too slow, I could feel it. We took off, and immediately started going to the left, banking hard to the left, and I knew we were going to crash. I knew we were going to crash the moment I started to get on that plane. That was my premonition.

KING: Really?

LAWSON: Yeah. And so...

KING: Why didn't you get off?

LAWSON: Well, that's a good question. And I wrote a -- I'm in the process of trying to finish a book about why didn't I get off.

KING: You switched seats, though, right?

LAWSON: I switched seats from 6-A to 1-F.

KING: Why?

LAWSON: Well, because the flight -- the ticket agent recognized me, and he wanted an autograph for his wife. I gave it to him, so he gave me a first-class seat. So I went to 1-F.

KING: The person in 6 died?

LAWSON: The person in 6-A died.

KING: How many died in the crash?

LAWSON: Twenty-seven people died; 24 people lived.

KING: Do you remember hitting the water?

LAWSON: I don't remember hitting the water. I remember the sky lighting up outside the window, and I remember it was like in slow motion. I was very, very conscious, in present time, and I lost track of, like, when the plane hit the ground again, that it went into some kind of spin, and we wound up in the water. And I was under water, trapped in my seat.

KING: Freezing, right?

LAWSON: Well, I wasn't aware of the cold.

KING: No?

LAWSON: Not at that point, no. I wasn't aware of the cold until after I got out of the plane and got on land that I was soaking wet, covered with jet fuel, and then I was in freezing temperatures.

KING: Who pulled you out?

LAWSON: Well, no one actually pulled me out. I got up out of the water after I decided that I was going to live. And somebody -- an unknown person stuck their arm through this hole in the side of the plane, and pulled me out of the plane. And I got on top of the plane, and a piece of the plane that had been bent over like a sardine can. And then there was this -- I guess some flame hit a pocket of jet fuel. We all jumped off, and walked around the front of the plane, which we discovered at that time was only five feet deep.

KING: You weren't in deep enough water, so you were able to walk?

LAWSON: Yes.
******************

KING: Do you believe god was with you there?

SEYMOUR: I -- yes, I believe. I believe that there is some spiritual entity that's greater than us. I do not belong to any specific organized religion. I have always believed that, and I believe it even more so now. I believe that someone was listening to me, and someone is giving me an incredibly blessed life.

KING: You lucky, Matthew?

LAWSON: Richard? Yes.

KING: Richard, I'm sorry.

LAWSON: That's all right. Sure, I -- you know what, I am lucky.

KING: Cause you switched seats?

LAWSON: Well, I mean...

KING: But the other guy wasn't.

LAWSON: No, the other lady wasn't, and it was funny, because the -- there was two ladies that took those seats, and the first lady, who sat in 6-A had a weird feeling at Kendra St. Charles (ph), and she asked to move -- to change seats with her friend. And so I sat there first, and then she sat there, and we both had -- you know, something happened that changed that seat, and that lady that wound up sitting there didn't make it.

So, yes, I am very lucky, but I'm very fortunate to have had that experience. I think experiences like that, for whatever reasons we are blessed enough to be the ones to survive it, gives us something that, I think, that few people have.

KING: You'll never be the same.

LAWSON: No. No.
***********************

KING: Richard, how have you changed?

LAWSON: I don't think that I've changed a lot other than to sort of confirm the things that I always knew. I have -- dove into the aspect of creation, art, writing. I've written a book. I'm now doing the things that I've always wanted to do, and I'm sort of -- I'm more walking the walk than talking the talk.

KING: Are you afraid to fly?

LAWSON: Not at all. Not at all. I'm a great flyer, because what I realize is -- you know what my philosophy is? I live every day like as if that's the last day on Earth.

KING: Tim McGraw's song.

LAWSON: Maybe so. But I expect to die at the end of the day. And, so therefore, I'm going to make sure I get it all in.

******************

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Investigators are laying out the pieces left from Sunday's U.S. Air Flight 405, looking to explain the plane's failure to stay in the air just after lifting off. The commuter jet bounced over an embankment and broke into pieces, with most of the bodies spinning upside down into Flushing Bay.

LAWSON: And I was completely pinned under water. I didn't think I was going to live. As a matter of fact, the thought that I had was, you know, just be calm in this death, just be calm. Don't fight and struggle, you know. And so -- then another voice came to me and said, you know, get out of here, you can do this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)
*********************

SEYMOUR: Well, actually, my sister had a brain aneurysm. And just before she collapsed, her brain aneurysm, she clearly saw my father who had died exactly four years to the day, to the hour, that she collapsed. And she saw him sitting right next to her. So that was very bizarre. But that didn't happen to me.

KING: Did you have anything like that, Richard?

LAWSON: Not flashing before me. I mean, what flashed before me was this truth, and this, like, I was saying to you about that plane, I knew that the plane was going to crash.

KING: Still you got on?

LAWSON: I still got on. And it's that voice, that battling of that one side of you that knows the truth and the other side of you that is just euphoric in nature, and wants to be satisfied. That middle class part of me made me stay on that plane.
*********************

BADERINWA: And I appreciate this caller from Chattanooga, Tennessee. Thank you so much for calling in.

You know, for me personally, I've never really looked at myself as a victim, because there are so many people who actually die from this experience. I just did the story on Giuseppe Papandrea, father of six, 61-years-old, he didn't make it. But both of us, we survived. And I would just encourage you to look at that, instead of looking at this negative experience, turn it into something positive. Try to take this experience and say, well, why did I survive? What am I to do with my life now? And try to live it to its fullest. Not one moment did I ever think that I wasn't going to make it. That I wasn't going to pull through this, even though I have a permanent disability with my arm. You continue with life.

KING: Very well put. I notice you're nodding, Richard.

LAWSON: Yes. You know, I think -- you know, it's an interesting thing, this post-traumatic stress. The easiest thing to do is look at the problem. If you're trying to look for a reason why, you could stay forever looking for why. If you're looking to solutions and looking to what is good in your life and what is positive in your life, and you get rid of the people who are negative and dark in your life, you have a greater chance of surviving. It's not about why you did it or why it happened. It's about, well, what do I have? And what's in front of me? And what can I do? KING: Very well put. We'll be back with more. Don't go away.
******************************
KING: What about you, Richard?

LAWSON: Well, when I was under water for close to two minutes probably, there was a -- there was a moment where I did think that I was going to -- that was it, because it was in this plane crash, I was under water, I couldn't move. All of the data that I had going through me said, there's no way. And then there came a moment when my will became stronger than the circumstance.

KING: You wanted to live.

LAWSON: I wanted to live. And that was true for a lot of people who -- there was 27 people that died and 18 people drowned, and there's 24 people who lived. And a good deal of the people who lived talked about the similar experience of getting to a place where death was imminent, and they knew it, and they made a decision to live. And that's one of the things that I think I'm very well aware of today, that living is a choice.
*****************

KING: Let's get caught up on things now for these folks. What are you doing now, Richard?

LAWSON: I'm teaching, where I've taught for the last 25 years, at the Beverly Hills Playhouse. I started this new camera technique class called the Richard Lawson's on-camera class, and you can find it at RichardLawson.net. And it's changing actors' and people's lives. It's really a revolutionary kind of thing. I'm using technology to really, you know, show people how to really act on film.

Who REALLY directed "Poltergeist?" (Page 1 of 3)

"The most startling rumor about the film-that it was actually directed by Spielberg-does seem to have basis in fact. All the crewmembers we have spoken to say that Spielberg was very active on the set, to the point where he should at least be considered co-director, though Tobe Hooper will have the sole director's credit."
-From an early 1982 issue of "FANGORIA," before the film's release.


Above, Steven Spielberg gives (direction?) to Craig T. Nelson and James Karen in the film's climax.

"Tobe isn't what you'd call a take-charge sort of guy. He's just not a strong presence on a movie set. If a question was asked and an answer wasn't immediately forthcoming, I'd jump up and say what we could do. Tobe would nod agreement, and that became the process of the collaboration. I did not want to direct the movie-I had to do 'E.T.' five weeks after principal photography on 'Poltergeist.'"

"My enthusiasm for wanting to make 'Poltergeist' would have been difficult for any director I would have hired. It derived from my imagination and my experiences, and it came out of my typewriter [after re-writing the Grais/Victor draft]. I felt a proprietary interest in this project that was stronger than if I was just an executive producer. I thought I'd be able to turn 'Poltergeist' over to a director and walk away. I was wrong. [On future films] If I write it myself, I'll direct it myself. I won't put someone else through what I put Tobe through, and I'll be more honest in my contributions to a film."

-Steven Spielberg made the above comments to writer Dale Pollock in a May, 1982 interview with the "L.A. Times." He also said that he "designed" the movie through story boards and that he was involved in all the camera setups and the designing of the specific shots.  Spielberg went on to say that his intense involvement with the film came from his commitment to MGM to bring the production in within 10% of its approved budget of $9.5 million (it ultimately cost $10.8 million). This newspaper article was published before the film was even released, and it gave voice to the numerous rumors that were already circulating in Hollywood that Spielberg had largely supplanted Tobe Hooper as director during filming. Largely due to this article, the DGA began an investigation into Spielberg's statements. On June 2, 1982, Spielberg would issue an apology of sorts in a letter to Hooper, which was published in "Variety":
"Regrettably, some of the press have misunderstood the rather unique, creative relationship which you and I shared throughout the making of 'Poltergeist.' I enjoyed your openness in allowing me, as producer and writer, a wide berth for creative involvement, just as I know you were happy with the freedom you had to direct Poltergeist so wonderfully.Through the screenplay you accepted a vision of this very intense movie from the start, and as the director, you delivered the goods. You performed responsibly and professionally throughout, and I wish you great success on your next project."
Spielberg attempted further damage control when he wrote a letter of clarification to "Time" magazine for their June 21, 1982 edition (in response to comments he made in an interview with them the prior issue):

TIME has made E.T. and me very happy. However, a comment slipped in that is unfair to Tobe Hooper, the director of Poltergeist. I am quoted as indicating that I took over the project. While I was creatively involved in the entire production, Tobe Hooper alone was the director.
-Notice how he says his comment about "taking over" the film "slipped in" (during the prior interview). He doesn't deny making the comment.

 

In a July 1982 AP article after the film was released, Jobeth Williams was asked about the issue:

But according to Miss Williams and other industry insiders, the directing job was more of a collaborative effort."Steven (Spielberg) was there every day," said the Texas-born actress. "He had very clear and strong ideas about what he wanted done and how he wanted it done. "Even though Tobe was there and participating," she added, "you felt Steven had the final say on everything." The actress says that in the initial days of shooting there often was confusion with two people giving conflicting directions. "Sometimes Steven would tell us one thing and Tobe another," Miss Williams said. "But they soon realized that was doing us more harm than good, so they stopped. Later on, whatever discussions Tobe and Steven had, they held in private and then came to us with their decisions."

In 2000, Tobe Hooper was asked about the controversy in an interview with the "AV Club" web site.
Full interview here.

Excerpt:

O: How did you come to direct Poltergeist?
TH: I'd known Steven Spielberg from the time I came to L.A. He and I were talking, and I said I wanted to do a ghost story. And he said, "Cool." I mean, I don't know if he said "cool," but he said let's do it. I mentioned The Haunting, the Robert Wise film, and that had also been a favorite of Steven's when he was growing up. So it came out of that moment.
O: History has shifted some of the credit toward Spielberg. Can you set the record straight on that?
TH: I've kind of talked that one to death, really. I've been asked that so many times that I feel the record should be straight already. The genesis of it came from an article in The L.A. Times: When we were shooting the practical location on the house, the first two weeks of filming were exterior, so I had second-unit shots that had to be picked up in the front of the house. I was in the back of the house shooting Robbie [actor Oliver Robins] and the tree, looking down at the burial of the little tweety bird, so Steven was picking those shots up for me. The L.A. Times arrived on the set and printed something like, "We don't know who's directing the picture." The moment they got there, Steven was shooting the shot of the little race cars, and from there the damn thing blossomed on its own and started becoming its own legend. Really, that is my knowledge of it, because I was making the movie and then I started hearing all this stuff after it was finished. I really can't set the record much straighter than that, because Steven did write the screenplay and there are other credits on there, but it came down to Steven and myself sitting at his house. He wrote the screenplay, and we gathered around a poltergeist textbook for the research, which was actually Robert Wise's research book that he had on The Haunting. When I got my offices at Universal, a couple of books had been left behind. Robert Wise had just moved out.

************************

However, the "L.A. Times" article Hooper mentions above actually went into much more detail than he claimed. It's the same article in which Spielberg made the statements that spurred the DGA inquiry. Some additional excerpted quotes from the article follow. You can purchase a copy of the full version ('POLTERGEIST': WHOSE FILM IS IT?) here.

******************
Tobe Hooper (saying he did everything his contract as director required of him)
"I don't understand why any of these questions have to be raised. I always saw this film as a collaborative situation between my producer, my writer, and myself. Two of those people were Steven Spielberg, but I directed the film and I did fully half of the story boards. I'm quite proud of what I did...I can't understand why I'm being slighted. I love the changes that were made from my cut. I worked for a very good producer who is also a great showman. I felt that was a plus, because Steven and I think in terms of the same visual style."

Jobeth Williams
"It was a collaboration with Steven having the final say. Tobe had his own input, but I think we knew that Steven had the final say. Steven is a strong-minded person and knew what he wanted. We were lucky because we got input from two very imaginative people."

Craig T. Nelson
"Tobe gave me a lot of direction. It's not fair to eliminate what Tobe did-he gave me a tremoundous amount of support because he's a warm, sensitive, caring human being. Tobe was simply pushed out of the picture after turning in his cut."

Bill Varney (Sound Mixer), said he had no contact with Tobe:
"He [Tobe] dropped by one or two times, but he had no input whatsoever as far as our (sound) work was concerned. Basically, Tobe didn't particpate at all."

Dennis E. Jones (Production Manager)
"Some directors kick the producer off the set. In this particuluar case, that didn't occur. It was an amicable situation-Tobe seemed to resolve Steven's participation in his mind. But I'm sure inside he was hurting."

Mike Fenton (Casting Director)
"Did he [Tobe] direct the film? Not that I saw."

Jerry Goldsmith (Composer), says he worked exclusively with Spielberg. He said the situation was "unusual, because 99% of the time I work with the director."

Willie Hunt (Production Executive who was working with United Artists but had supervised "Poltergeist" when she was with MGM)
"Both people were on the set all the time, and Tobe was very much involved, as far as I could tell. But Steven was the creative force in my opinion; his stamp is on the film, even though there was a good, solid competent director there."

Frank Marshall (Producer)
"It all depends on your definition of director. The job of the producer is to get the film finished, and that's what we did. The creative force on this movie was Steven. Tobe was the director and was on the set every day. But Steven did the design for every story board and he was on the set every day except for three days when he was in Hawaii with [George] Lucas."

Also according to Marshall, Hooper handed in his cut of the film on October 17, 1981, and was virtually not involved in any post-production work until he screened the movie on April 17, 1982. Spielberg and Marshall denied that Hooper was denied access to or control of the film at any stage.

And finally, from the article, when talking about how Spielberg's contract with Universal forbade him from working on any other picture while directing "E.T.":

"Even had it not, Directors Guild rules prevent anyone assigned to a production prior to a director being fired from replacing the director-including the producer. 'There is a director of 'Poltergeist' and he is listed as Tobe Hooper,' said Michael Franklin, national executive secretary of the Directors Guild. 'If something is going on that dereogates that credit, the guild would be concerned.'"

In addition, here's some info I received from someone who at one time had planned to write a book about the making of "Poltergeist":

I even did interviews with James Karen, Zelda Rubinstein, Jerry Goldsmith, and started an aborted one with Craig T. Nelson. Long story short, but some forces at Amblin threatened (or hinted at) legal action about the book. So my publisher dropped it, and I went on to do [another book].

Anyway, the interviews were interesting -- I still have them on cassette tape. Particularly the whole 'Who really directed 'Poltergeist'' thing. Rubinstein was hilarious -- 'Tobe Hooper couldn't even direct traffic!' -- while James Karen was all pro-Hooper. Goldsmith claims he never even met Hooper, only Spielberg. Nelson was just a jerk, quite frankly.

Here's an excerpt from producer Julia Phillips' book "You'll Never Eat Lunch in this Town Again":

Steven takes a tentative puff on my joint, coughs, and passes it back to me. We haven't spoken in four years, but we have run into each other on the MGM lot, where he is directing "Poltergeist." He is supposed to be producing it, but Tobe Hooper, the director, it is whispered, has lost his cookies and Steven has had to step in. I wonder if Steven has been the first to whisper the Hooper rumors. It would fit his m.o. We are acting as if nothing bad ever happened between us, and Steven has walked back to my set of offices with me, the ex-offices of Louis B. Mayer, which I have defiled with acres of chintz. Steven has asked for the joint, which surprises me, he is such a straightnik. Maybe it is his way of getting along with me on my terms. We hang out for a considerable period, and I am furious the entire time. I don't indicate this externally at all, so I am working on a hell of a stomach ache. Thank God there is no Sara Lee anything around. "Yup, all hell is gonna break loose in this room," Steven says. "We're gonna rotate the whole room day after tomorrow..."

........

"You should come by and see it..." he says now.


Julia went on to say she'd visit the set, but apparently never did.

Zelda Rubinstein would say this about the issue in a 2007 AICN interview: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/34266

Quint: There’s one thing that I’m really curious about. Being an Austinite I’ve run into Tobe Hooper and I’ve talked to him at length about his work on POLTERGEIST and I brought up the big rumor that Spielberg came in to direct it and kind of took over. Tobe was very adamant that he directed the film.

Zelda Rubinstein: I can tell you that Steven directed all six days I was there. I only worked six days on the film and Steven was there. Tobe set up the shots and Steven made the adjustments.

You’re not going to hear that from Tobe Hooper, you’ll hear it from Zelda, because that was my honest to God experience. I’m not a fan of Tobe Hooper.

Quint: You’re not?

Zelda Rubinstein: No, I’m not, because I feel he allowed… I don’t know how to say this… he allowed some unacceptable chemical agents into his work.

I felt that immediately. I felt that when I first interviewed for the job. Steven was there, Tobe was there, two casting people from MGM were there and I felt at that time Tobe was only partially there.

As Zelda implies above, persistent rumors about Tobe's alleged substance abuse at the time (and possible entry into rehab after the film finished shooting) have circulated for years. Author John Baxter, in the unauthorized biography "Steven Spielberg," writes on page 250 about cocaine use in Hollywood: "Rumours also spoke of its wide-spread use on the set of Poltergeist." Who was allegedly engaging in this widespread use was left unsaid.
Baxter also interviewed Jerry Goldsmith, who stated "I worked only with Steven. One day Hooper came into a screening and sat down. Steve just ignored him, and after five minutes he got up and left." [Goldsmith's] estimate of the shooting: "Hooper said 'Action' and that's the last thing he did." 
Writer David Giler of "Alien" fame was an extra in the football scene early in the film, along with Spielberg's agent Guy McElwaine. Quoted in Joesph McBride's book "Steven Spielberg-A biography," Giler states "When I came back from the set, I said 'Well, now I know what the executive producer does. I've always wondered. He sets up the camera, tells the actors what to do, stands back, and lets the director say 'Action!'" Another person who visited the set told McBride that it was "uncomfortable," since whenever Hooper would give an instruction to cinematographer Matthew F. Leonetti, Leonetti would look over his shoulder at Spielberg, who would either shake his head or nod.
At a 25th anniversary screening of the film I attended in Santa Monica, I recorded a panel discussion in which the "who really directed it" question was asked:
As you'll see in the clip, Mark Victor and James Karen sort of tap danced around the question and offered "politically correct" statements, but Zelda was more than happy to say that she "had a slightly different view." She explained how during the 6 days she worked on the film, Tobe would line up the shots, but Steven would "make final adjustments." In conclusion, she said "Tobe was the nominal director...but this was a Steven Spielberg film" (to the sounds of applause from the audience).
Clip: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4099450078852807092

Continued here.......

Who REALLY directed Poltergeist? (Page 2 of 3)

I came across some VERY interesting comments on one of the message boards over at the fan site SpielbergFilms.com. The person who made the postings calls himself "BenThere." He worked on the original film and had his own thoughts about the controversy. He did not want to reveal his real name or what he did on the film (I know who he is but will not reveal his identity). Below are his excerpted postings. For the full original discussion, I've also got the link to the message board where his comments first appeared (note: the link below doesn't work because the site was taken down, but luckily I was able to retain Ben's posts):

from:

http://www.spielbergfilms.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3949

 

As this is my first-ever post here, I'll start by thanking and congratulating Steven Awalt for creating a site that so wonderfully allows this exchange of opinion and commentary.

I find it fascinating that some two and a half decades 'after the fact' no definitive answer has, yet, been given the question of Poltergeist's director. How could so many eye-witness the making of this film and not uniformly recall who, exactly, called "Action!" and "Cut!"... who, exactly, provided the stage direction... who, exactly, answered the questions from all cast and crew?

Take, for example, the claim of actor, William Finley, who, according to E-Buzz, said: "... Finley confirms he was originally cast in the role of Marty, presumably by Tobe Hooper. He (Finley) says: "I can't tell you that whole story because it's still sort of a Hollywoood scandal... One of the people who did direct the movie cast me in it and one of the people who did direct the movie cast me out of it... one of those people won."

A more ambiguous quote seems unlikely - but it holds the best clue in this entire thread. I suggest you'll more properly and much more quickly solve this mystery upon changing focus from who directed Poltergeist to why any doubt should still exist. Discover the "why" and the reason for all ambiguity in this matter will be quite apparent. To point you in the right direction, I'll reference the following comments - and allow this obvious hint... (DGA).

Steven Awalt allowed, that, "The L.A. Times ran a great piece on the situation back in 1982. An article that, I believe, spurred the DGA inquiry and Spielberg's subsequent full page letter to Hooper in the trades."

And furtney replied, "From what I understand, Spielberg was forced by the DGA to place that ad in "Variety" (it was part of the "settlement" he agreed to).

Again: WHY does the question of Poltergeist's director still exist?

 

 

 

"So why is there (this) whole section about it? I know (Spielberg) produced it but he produced a lot of movies that aren't here." (Jimmy Legs)

EXACTAMUNDO, Jimmy. Spielberg "produced" about 50 films that also credit someone else as their "director." Why, then, do you figure, that, of all those films, Poltergeist is the only one to have resulted in a controversy over who REALLY directed it?

--------------

"... Turner Classic Movies (cable channel) runs a short documentary from the 80's about Poltergeist (that) shows Steven Spielberg on set with Tobe Hooper... and without Hooper directing the actors and crew." (tashtego)

I've seen another documentary showing just the opposite. Of course, at a running time of just two seconds it's MUCH shorter.

---------------

"Poltergeist is a Toby Hooper film... I don't think Steven Spielberg would sabotage a director from his duties. ... What I liked about Poltergeist was how much Toby Hooper dedicated Spielberg's style with his strength as a storyteller. That's good directing." (SamKarns)

That's pure rubbish.

---------------

"Believe me, I know very well Hooper´s style. I´ve seen all his films, even the bad ones, and (Poltergeist) is a Hooper film. (Grady)

BELIEVE ME... you haven't a clue.

----------------

"There was contradiction and conflict between Hooper and Spielberg even in pre-production though, with Hooper approving one thing and Spielberg coming in and scraping it, telling the department head to rework things in his vision, etc. These things have even been talked about publicly, most famous by effects artist Craig Reardon, who (in addition to, then, working with Spielberg on Poltergeist) was working with Spielberg concurrently on "E.T." (Steven Awalt)

Thanks Steven.

O.K. kids... focus on the word "concurrently" as used above. Combine that clue with the first one ("DGA") and see what you come up with. Come on now... don't be shy... squeak up! Show me something and I'll provide another clue. Show me nothing... I'll be gone. At that point, you will have refused to open the door when opportunity knocked

 

 

 

 

 

"Do you have any further information on the situation?" (E-Buzz)


Enough to speak expertly, yes.

For many years, now, the question "Who directed Poltergeist?" has been put to a slew of eyewitnesses ranging from producer, Frank Marshall, to leading actors, Jo Beth Williams and Craig T. Nelson, to a number of various crew personnel. Even Tobe Hooper and Steven Spielberg, themselves, have been asked this question. So, how, or why is it, then, they should all answer in a consistent and uniform manner as to never really identify - beyond any and all doubt - who, exactly, directed the film? They'd all have us believe that Poltergeist is one of those very rare instances where, rather innocently, a producer became somewhat "involved" with directorial chores to a degree that some might simply "conclude" it was directed by the producer... hence their collective ambiguity on the matter.

Filmmaking is, by far, the most collaborative "art." The reason so many names are listed in the screen credits is simple: Their individual contributions were absolutely necessary. Was there "collaboration" between Tobe and Steven? Of course there was... how could there not be? Still, just like upwards of 99.9% of all studio made films, Poltergeist had only one, true, "director."

Singularly, that director decided every question and/or suggestion from all principal cast and all key crew personnel. That director, singularly, called
"Action" and "Cut."

Had the various media asked those folks who it was that answered all the questions, and who it was that called "Action and Cut" - instead of asking
"Who directed it?" - there'd be a lot more clarity and a lot less ambiguity on the issue.

If you have any questions about your namesake I'll attempt only straight answers. BTW, E-Buzz followed his trainer's commands unlike any other dog I've ever seen.

 

 

 

 

This is a great thread... The points about movie ownership/vision, producer vs. director (and writer) made me think beyond the Lucas example..." (TechInept)

The reasons a movie is referred to as "A (producer's name here) Production" and then qualified as "A (director's name here) Film" are right and proper.

A Producer acquires rights to a story; commissions or purchases a screenplay for that story; arranges its financial backing and; hires its Director. After that, the role of a Producer could be likened to that of a CEO. Just how much of a "chief" that Producer wishes to act is completely dependent on the individual Producer. Thus, "A Jerry Bruckheimer Production."

A Director oversees all other aspects of the filmmaking process. In collaboration, firstly, with the Writer, Casting Director, Production Designer, Cinematographer, Costumer Designer and, eventually, with all other "keys" the Director decides all questions that will ultimately and permanently affect the final product. Thus, "A Michael Bay Film."

It's a very rocky road for all concerned when Producer and Director are at odds with each other.

-----------------

"The riddles/clues dropped have me totally intrigued--concurrent productions, 2nd Unit directors . . ." (TechInept)

If memory serves, it was Tobe who, again, with tongue-in-ambiguous-cheek, said something about how fortunate he was to have worked on Poltergeist with the best 2nd Unit Director in the business. (For all that is known he might even have been referring to himself.)

 

 

 

Yow! That's cold!" (Steven Awalt)

Some do find me that way, yes. I believe, rather, that I am "direct" and, at times, too brutally honest. Should I offer a truly "cold" comment... I'm sure you'll see the difference.

Round up Tobe's exact quote, put it in proper context, and explain how my comment could possibly be anything less than truthful.

BTW Steven, I'm having a reasonably fun time here... thanks.
2nd BTW: If Tobe's a great director... I'm an astronaut.

 

 

 

 

"... it's difficult for some people to accept (that Tobe Hooper) was effectively sidelined on Poltergeist, as seems to have been the case. Did this make it a somewhat difficult/uncomfortable set to be on?" (E-Buzz)

Uncomfortable - not really. Difficult - very, but there were many reasons for that experience to have been so. Poltergeists sets were scattered about on 3 different sound stages at MGM. Actually that is not unusual for any feature film, but what was unusual was how often we'd have to move from one stage to another. In addition to frequently moving a large amount of heavy film equipment was the overall pace of production. It was unusually fast, often frantic, and sometimes furious.

Richard Edlund (then with ILM) worked concurrently on many sets. His camera was an especially large monstrosity and accomodating that camera's special needs was never easy. Also, many sets were built in multiples of two or three. The kids bedroom, for instance, existed simultaneously in three forms: firstly, on the flat surface of the stage floor; secondly, 3' over the stage floor and then; thirdly, on a gimbal (a ferris-wheel like device) built over an open pit dug into the stage floor.

All to accommodate the extensive amount of visual and physical special effects that were a necessary part of the film. Had our pace been any slower we could have easily been a month or more over schedule. As it was, I think we finished shooting just a few days over schedule.

--------------

"Are there any parts/moments that could be indisputably said to be Hooper's contribution?" (E-Buzz)

Certainly, there were, yes.

--------------

"BTW: I was glad to hear that my namesake was so-well trained. Having recently seen Poltergeist in the cinema I was impressed by 'my' performance and obvious screen presence." (E-Buzz)

It wasn't that E was so well-trained as much as it was the unique manner in which E was trained. Every dog handler uses hand and sound signals in combination with speech to cue the animals reaction. These three methods are used, most often, in equal combination.

Dog wrangler, Richard Caulkins, had only two or three trained "movie dogs" to show. None of them passed the audition, but, instead, it was his personal dog (E) who won the job. E, however, was Richard's pet. He had never trained E for film work because he wanted a pet... a companion.

Just before each shot Richard simply articulated his instructions to E (like he was talking to a human being) and then he'd verbally coach E while each scene was being shot. I've seen many a child actor disregard or fail screen direction more often than E did. E-Buzz was a most amazing dog.

 

 

 

 

What was the reason for the furious pace of production? Was it spurred on by a filmmaker who had just discovered how effectively he could work at speed on a film like, say, Raiders of the Lost Ark?" (E-Buzz)

Well, E-Buzz, the particular filmmaker you refer here is, obviously, Spielberg. I cannot speak with any inside knowledge on the Raider pace. Just the other day, however, I did mention a thing or two about the Jurassic pace. To wit:


-------
J.P. used life-sized animatronic dinosaurs. In essence, they were "machines" and considering their complicated engineering, construction, de-construction, packing, shipping and eventual reassemblage made them all quite vulnerable to certain malfunction and breakage. Consider, too, they had to repeatedly function in high winds, heavy rains and oppressive humidity. Repairing them was expected to be common, difficult, and slow.

J.P. lost nearly a week of shoot-time after suffering a Category-5 hurricane while filming in Hawaii.

J.P. shot, approximately, one extra day to film some "tests" for Schindler's List.

In light of the above, remember that a good percentage of feature films require more shooting days than are originally scheduled. Only half are likely to finish "on schedule."

So, here's the most incredible thing about Jurassic Park: It was completed some three weeks prior to its scheduled finish date.
--------

Jurassic Park felt as much a track meet as a film shoot!

 

 

 

"If anyone here has any real grounds to feel one way or the other about Mr. Hooper, you would... Gotta respect "Texas Chainsaw Massacre," though, right? (Steven Awalt)

I do. Given Texas' limited time and budget, I think Tobe did a fine job, but a "great directorial effort" does not a "great director" make. Tobe is not without certain filmmaking skills - I'll give him that much. Still, he's as far from being a great director as this astronaut is from space travel.

-------------------

"Have you read the "Poltergeist" chapter in the book "Directed by Steven Spielberg"?

No, but I'm certain it does not parallel the Poltergeist chapter in my own memory. Who wrote that fairly tale?

 

 

 

 

Thanks Steven. As I figured even before your Cliff's Notes version, Buckland's book is based on just enough fact to qualify as "fairly tale." Indeed, some things must be believed to be seen. His concoction is nothing more than snake oil.

With regard to the relationship of director-to-editor in the filmmaking process: Any yo-yo can read the script and, then, armed with the film product "cut it" somewhat cohesively. The best editors, however, trim the fat faster than a butcher; creatively explore certain "options" that can dramatically affect a film's pace; and even tweak scene placement to better effect than the script.

One such editor was Verna Fields, from whom Steven learned all he needed to know. She opened his eyes to much he'd never even considered.

As I said here in a different thread: Film directors ply their trade with an array of tools. Some directors may use a couple of those tools to even better effect than Steven Spielberg, but there's no question that Steven has MORE tools and a BETTER COMMAND of those tools than any other film director in history. (At least from my point of view.) He doesn't really need great talent to make a great film. His greatest strength, if not his least known, is an unfailing ability to coax extraordinary things from quite ordinary people. That ability is but one of his tools and he wields it in varying manner to achieve his purpose.

As he does with Michael Kahn.

 

 

 

 

"There was in fact one very notable shot in the film that Hooper and the production heads tried to get away from the storyboards on due to some technical issues, and Spielberg insisted that they work it out and get the shot..." (Steven Awalt)

"What was the shot in question?" (kevin)

If my guess is correct, the shot would be in the Freeling living room that featured an inattentive Richard Lawson who is pencil sketching his still doubtful depiction of what a ghost might look like if it were to manifest on the stairway. Self-absorbed and lost in the music on his headphones, he is oblivious that some of the high-tech parapsychological equipment has just whirred into action as mysterious balls of light decend that stairway.

Do I hear any opening bids for that original Lawson pencil sketch?

-------------

"I don't know why anyone questions SS's major involvement with the film. It was clearly a joint effort on both Hooper and Spielberg's part. The movie just screams Spielberg, with a nice touch of Hooper might I add." (tashtego)

-------------

"Was there 'collaboration' between Tobe and Steven? Of course there was... how could there not be?" (Ben There)

-------------

"Are there any parts/moments that could be indisputably said to be Hooper's contribution?" (E-Buzz)

"Certainly, there were, yes." (Ben There)

-------------

So, tashtego: Poltergeist SCREAMS SPIELBERG - with just a nice touch of Hooper, eh? I'd say yours is a most omniscient comment for not having witnessed the films making.

 

 

 

 

"... it's interesting hearing your points about the creation of the film... I'd love to hear more, as I'm sure would everyone." (tj)


If you've read all my posts, tj, you know I've already said so much more than a mouthful. If you have any questions, please, ask away. What I'll not reveal is the name of Poltergeist's director nor my own. Still, those answers should be readily apparent in my past comments. I have, indeed, "Ben There" many, many, times over three and a half decades in "the biz" and I know of which I speak. So, again... just ask away.

 

 

 

In (Poltergeist), several Kenner Star Wars toys are visible. So are some Star Wars posters. Given Spielberg's motto in other films to incorporate Star Wars nods, did Spielberg actually pay to purchase these toys and posters or were they furnished by Lucasfilm?" (tj)


Firstly, I've never been aware any such Spielberg "motto" (per se), but it is always good business sense to include a visual nod to any close friend, or to the work of a close friend, as long as that visual nod is a natural fit within the framework of the film.

My short answer to your question is this: Directors and Producers will, invariably, affect certain choices made in the acquisition of any and all properties, but only a Set Decorator and a Property Master can make those acquisitions - by manner of renting, purchasing, manufacturing, or borrowing. So, no, Spielberg didn't pay for those toys and posters (himself) and I cannot recall their ever being furnished by LucasFilm.

In this case, the Set Decorator and Propery Master purchased those toys and posters directly and/or borrowed them through a signed agreement with either, the manufacturers of those items or with a Product Placement company. More to your point, however; yes, there were at least a couple meetings and memos with regard to which particular toys (and posters) should be used as props and set dressing in the kid's bedroom.

--------------

"Also, there is an Alien movie poster in Carol Anne's bedroom. Were these placed specifically on the set by Spielberg or was it left up to a designer? I've always just wondered how they were actually picked for the placement among the set." (tj)

"Ben There may have different info when he responds, but I would be shocked if Spielberg didn't have a hand in the "Alien" poster's placement. He's a massive fan of the movie." (Steven Awalt)



Bear in mind, firstly, the importance of certain "legalities" involved whenever a copyrighted prop is to be photographed. The two people charged with affecting permission to photograph such things are, again, the Set Decorator and Property Master. Let there be no mistake: Production Designers, Art Directors, and Set Designers have no such concerns. The specific (original) placement of furnishings within the set is, most often, a matter of choice for the Set Decorator - with the occasional or, even, frequent input of a Production Designer.

As to who, in fact, picked the particular place to affix that "Alien" poster... I've no recollection. Of course, the sets are "dressed" and approved prior to being filmed, but often while, either, rehearsing or blocking, a change in the actual placement of the furniture or furnishings must be made before the scene can be filmed. As to who determined the absolute necessity of that poster, well, of course, that was... the Director.

----------------

"Also, the Queste Verde Estates. What was the scenario that led to picking the suburban location in California that would represent the QV Estates on film?" (tj)


I've no knowledge that any "scenario" caused a certain area to be chosen except as Cuesta Verde was described in the script and, thereby, perceived by the Director and/or Producer. Ultimately, however, all possibile choices are strictly within the purview of the Location Manager.

To Continue Reading More, click here:
www.poltergeist.poltergeistIII.com/reallyIII.html



Who Really Directed "Poltergeist?" (3 of 3)

Another source who worked on the film told me:
"In the beginning, Steven did occasionally yell action and say cut. Sometimes the actors got two different sets of directions from two directors. Sometimes they would be the opposite directions. After about three days of that, Beatrice Straight put her foot down and said she would only listen to one director. That was Tobe. After that, Steven was often on the set, but since he was prepping ET he wasn't there all the time. The only time I ever saw him really fight with Tobe was after an entire day of shooting a scene with Beatrice Straight and the other two scientists involving a great deal of gobblety-gook dialogue, Tobe just couldn't get the shot. Steven came onto the set and was very upset - there was a lot of ugly yelling - and Tobe just stood there taking it. Beatrice Straight, again the hero of the day, finally stood up to Steven, said that the dialogue (which I believe Steven himself had written for the scene) was unplayable and that Sir Laurence Olivier himself couldn't act such badly-written dreck. She made it very clear that Tobe was not to be blamed. Steven was very quiet and about five minutes later the cast and crew were all dismissed for the day. The next day the actors came back to the set and were handed new dialogue, which again I believe Steven had rewritten. It was 100% better and Tobe shot the scene in about an hour with no problem. But before shooting commenced, Steven got up in front of the entire cast and crew and apologized for the outburst and said Tobe was not to blame for the previous day's delays. It was one of the most generous, selfless and courageous things I had ever seen on a movie set. "
"BenThere" then disputed the particulars of the above recollection:
"I vehemently disagree with almost every detail recounted in that quote. I do not doubt your word that this person worked on the film - so, on that point, I stand corrected, but I believe I'm wrong ONLY on that point. As I said before: 'I'm just plain tired of hearing so much pure conjecture from the public - and so much pure BS from its principal players.' Certainly, my witness IS in the minority, as, to the best of my knowledge, no 'Poltergeist' cast or crew member has EVER publicly stated 'the whole truth and nothing but the truth' on the subject of its director. It may be said, that, in my many years of silence, I DID suppress the truth... but I most certainly DID NOT EVER perpetuate the falsities and outright lies as have so often been professed by many of our cast and crew.
By phone, I've already contacted two other 'Poltergeist' crew members who, like myself, were present 'on set' each and every day of shooting. As well, like myself, neither recall any such exchange among Steven, Tobe, and Beatrice - and, believe me - it's almost impossible that all three of us would EVER forget (or never even hear mentioned) such a 'generous, selfless, and courageous' apology as is claimed to have been given 'the entire cast and crew"... by Mr. Spielberg, no less!!

Semi-Interesting Side Note: Based on my intimate familiarity with the making of "Poltergeist," I believe the claimed exchange of dialogue and subsequent apology could only have taken place in the Interior Freeling House Set (ie. - kitchen, dining room, living room, downstairs bathroom, and staircase with upstairs landing, hall and bedroom doors). Most likely it would have occurred sometime around our shooting the Dr. Lesh / Diane discussion as a tea pot slides across the dining table on its own power... or the scene where Ryan (Richard Lawson) is listening to music via headphones while, simultaneously, sketching his version of a ghostly apparition - even as he fails to notice that his scientific 'ghost image capturing' equipment is, also, stirring to action. What's 'interesting' here is twofold: Firstly, we shot both of those scenes on the same day. Secondly, it was the ONLY day that Mr. Spielberg was, IN FACT, 'very upset - (and indeed) there was a lot of ugly yelling.' Your source got that much right and I would never again see him SO vocally express his displeasure to anyone else. By the way... (geez, I almost forgot)... most interesting of all is this: He was not 'upset' with, nor did he 'yell' at Tobe Hooper. He was upset with... and he yelled at... ME!"
Certainly, it IS possible that Beatrice's objections, Steven's outburst to Tobe, and Steven's apology were known only to a select group of individuals and not to so large a group as was inferred by your source. What DID happen in witness of a large number of cast and crew was Steven's outburst to me. Let me be very clear on this point: Some directors, (too many actually) are, in fact, "reamer/screamers" and they can be easily agitated and/or moved to anger by even the smallest of problems or setbacks. Mr. Spielberg, however, is NOT among them. He is a most cordial person, but he is human, after all, and his emotional facilities are definitely intact.

For very practical reasons, the entire film, or quite nearly the entire film was storyboarded. In purely artistic terms, the action as depicted in "Poltergeist's" storyboards was quite simple in nature... almost cartoonish. (This is not to slight our, then, storyboard artist, Ed Verreaux, who is now a production designer. His sketches were drawn in the style and manner of Steven's request.) In the earlier stages of preparing "Poltergeist" we were told the storyboards should not be taken too literally - they were not "the bible," then again, neither was the script, but I digress. The storyboards were most useful in keeping the entire crew 'all on the same page' and they provided a good deal of information as to how Steven wanted the film to be shot, especially in terms of his preferred camera angles, lens sizes, and camera movements.

Twenty five years later, I have yet to work another film that was so completely storyboarded as was "Poltergeist." The combined bulk of the storyboards made them almost twice as thick as the script itself and a steady stream of changes to both required our constant and diligent upkeep. As our remaining number of prep days decreased, emphasis on our knowledge of (and, therefore, the importance of) those storyboards increased. In short, it turned out that, sometimes, those storyboards WERE considered "the bible."

No more than a couple or three weeks before we began shooting, I was forced to inform Tobe the limitations on some of the technical equipment to be used in the film. I also confessed a lack of certain expertise on my part as well. Tobe was actually quite gracious and accomodating. He asked if his cutting the scene - in a place where neither the script nor the storyboards called for a cut - would solve my problem. Indeed, it would, and by his agreeance to do just that, I was greatly relieved.

Only days into our shoot, however, as we began to rehearse that scene it suddenly dawned on me that neither Tobe nor myself had ever made Steven aware of my problem and our agreed upon cut. My greatest fear was realized then as Steven's blocking of the scene did not allow the cut that I'd been assured of. I looked over at Tobe and he just raised his hands and rolled his eyes as if to say, "Hey... tell Steven your problem... I ain't directing this thing!" At that point, it became my distinct and very unfortunate task to tell Steven that I could not accomodate the shot he wanted to do. Quite frankly, I fully expected a swift and harsh reaction to that news... and, geez-louise... did I ever get it! I won't detail his exact words or the heated manner in which he communicated his thoughts, but, in essence, he wanted to know why I had failed to accomplish something that had been in the script AND in the storyboards for some three months.

In the moment, I did not take his wrath well... but I took it. Later that day, I had occasion to return that disfavor to him in nearly the same tone and in, exactly, the same words. Like I said before, you CAN argue with Steven... but you damn well better have good reason. If you don't have good reason, however, well you damn well better be nothing short of RIGHT!"
[I asked: And I'm assuming the shot in question involved Ryan making the pencil sketch while the camera tilts up toward the stairs...?]
"That is correct."
Here's another interesting rumor that someone posted on the IMDB:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001361/board/thread/30986916?p=8:
A famous rumor has it that the final shot (which was also the final shot of the entire production) was actually photographed by Spielberg himself, with Hooper off with several crew members getting drunk...he'd had enough and had left Spielberg to do whatever he wanted to do on the last night of shooting (something that King Vidor did to David O. Selznick on the last day of filming "Duel in the Sun"). I highly suspect this is a true story...that and another aside that said once the interior house sets had been shot out, Hooper punched holes in all the walls...Remember JoBeth Williams' words, "If I'd been Tobe I might have been resentful."
Some interesting message board posts from industry insiders follow.
From:
http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/reply/90411#reply-90411
The basic thing was that the aliens in NIGHT SKIES were impish, even dangerous, and Spielberg thought that didn't match with the benign aliens of CE3K. The impish/dangerous part went on over to POLTERGEIST.
http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/reply/90411#reply-90411

As for POLTERGEIST--what happened was that suddenly the producers realized they were about to release a family-oriented movie directed by none other than the director of THE TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE. The idea that Spielberg really directed the film, not Hooper, was actually created in house and leaked carefully to the press. Spielberg did direct a couple of scenes, but no more than that (though those are his hands in the fantasy scene of the guy pulling his face to pieces).
The making-of film created for the movie was part of this rejiggering everything to make POLTERGEIST a Spielberg movie rather than a Hooper movie. In it, there are several shots of Spielberg on the set; there's a single shot of Hooper, deep in the background, saying nothing, labeled "Tobe Hooper-Director." The official still set included a couple of shots of Spielberg; the only one featuring Hooper also included Spielberg, pointing something out to Tobe.
Hooper was TRYING to make the movie in the Spielberg style; that was the point of the script.
Another odd story that I think is true. Some people have noticed that the plot of POLTERGEIST is similar to that of Richard Matheson's story "Little Girl Lost," dramatized on TWILIGHT ZONE. Supposedly, Matheson was one of those who noticed this. Supposedly, TWILIGHT ZONE THE MOVIE was made largely to pay Matheson a big chunk of change to keep him from filing a plagiarism lawsuit over POLTERGEIST. But as I say, this is all "supposedly"--I have no way of knowing if this is true, just that I have heard this from some fairly reliable sources. But I know nothing of the reliability of THEIR sources.
*******************
Fanboys did not start the rumors. The impression was deliberately perpetrated by the film's promotional campaign. Tobe Hooper was a cult figure because of CHAINSAW MASSACRE, but his name didn't mean anything on a marquee; if anything it might scare away the intended audience of a PG film. Spielberg, on the other hand, had already directed some BIG movies, and audiences knew his name.

Before the film was released, I attended some kind of promo event at the Norris Theatre on the U.S.C. campus. The P.R. guy for the film came down and every other word out of his mouth was "Spielberg." Finally, someone asked him who directed the film, and his two-word answer was "Tobe Hooper." That was the first and last time Hooper's name was mentioned out loud that day. The p.r. guy went right back into his "Spielberg-Spielberg-Spielberg" routine.

There was also a short behind-the-scenes documentary, which consisted amost entirely of footage of Speilberg. There was one brief shot of Hooper somewhere on the sidelines, with his can of coke in his hand, standing silently. A subtitle identified him as the director, and that was it.

The whole question of who directed the movie comes up because of auteurist assumptions that the final film must represent the director's vision. Ergo, iit feels like a Spielberg film, Spielberg must have directed. POLTERGEIST is, I think, simply a Steven Spielberg production, directed by Tobe Hooper - kind of like THE THING FROM ANOTHER WORLD is a Howard Hawks production directed by Christian Nybe.
******************************************
http://monsterkidclassichorrorforum.yuku.com/topic/16541?page=3
A friend of mine who worked on the set of POLTERGEIST told me that most of the film was directed by Spielberg though I don't recall if he ever said what the percentage was. There is a line in an above post "...Hooper somewhere on the sidelines, with his can of coke in his hand, standing silently" that is just about how my friend described the situation on the set. The one night I was there during production it's my recollection that Spielberg was literally calling the shots. I realize this is all second hand and anecdotal so it doesn't really prove anything.
Since my first post on this topic I had a chance to check with my friend who worked on the set during the production of POLTERGEIST. Your description "of Spielberg directing the cast while Hooper is in a chair just watching them" is exactly what he told me it was like there. Hooper did not seem happy with the arraignment, according to my friend, but there wasn't much he could do about it.

****************************************
I did some articles on POLTERGEIST, though I forget who for. While the film was in production, rumors leaked out that Hooper had largely been supplanted as director by Spielberg. When I interviewed Frank Marshall, I asked him who'd directed the movie. His face froze, he paused, then asked why I wanted to know the answer to a question that didn't really seem to need to be asked. He said that Hooper directed it, but that Spielberg was also on the set a lot, and of course offered his input. I suspect this relates to the "director can't take over officially from producer" rule mentioned above--but it may have had another origin.
Spielberg liked TEXAS CHAIN SAW MASSACRE; it was his idea to hire Hooper. But then partway through the making, they realized that promoting the family-friendly movie--it was always intended to be that--as being by the director of that gross-out gore-fest might present certain problems. The rumors about Spielberg taking over were, according to this scenario, actually leaked by the producers themselves. That's why you get just a brief, silent shot of Hooper in the "making of." In the still set, there are several shots of Spielberg. The one shot of Hooper is >with< Spielberg, who is pointing down the hill at the suburbia set, clearly instructing Hooper on what to do.
A friend of mine worked makeup on the film, including that shot of the face being torn away by Spielberg's hands. He said that Tobe Hooper directed the movie. Craig T. Nelson has also made that assertion.
So who directed it? Beats me.
Another good question that I will not go into: what's the source of POLTERGEIST's plot?
Bill Warren
**************************************************
"There was one brief shot of Hooper somewhere on the sidelines, with his can of coke in his hand, standing silently.
Oh, and for my next feat of pedantry, Hooper's drink of choice is Dr. Pepper."
I think you got it right the first time. Apparently Mr. Hooper drank a lot of coke. On Funhouse, immediately afterward, word on the street is, he spent a lot of time locked in his trailer drinking coke. All that caffeine makes you a little jittery and, oh, perhaps a bit unreliable. Your judgment may be impaired; decisions may not be completely thought out. You find it far more important to drink more coke than to get on with business. And sometimes those around a big coke-drinker pick up the slack for him, since it's their jobs on the line.

Interesting that Hooper's best to films (IMHO) are 'Salem's Lot and Poltergeist, which both had very strong producers (and, I expect, finished scripts long before they hired a director).. Then when you get into something like Spontaneous Combustion... where he's all by his lonesome... oy. Oy!!! What went right???

(I was at the Academy screening of that, invited by the PR guy who wanted me to interview Hooper. After I saw the film, I cancelled. I told him I couldn't do an interview without talking about that film, and it stunk on ice; I didn't want to be a downer on it, so I just called off the interview. The audience-- invited, with a lot of heavyweights, plus cast and crew-- were in hysterics for an hour and a half.)
**********************************
This info is from a Special Effects artist who visited the set for one night. His friend was a crewmember on the film. Keep in mind this visit came during about the first full week of filming, which means that Spielberg was in control from a very early period. This night of shooting was done on location at the house in Simi Valley:
I'm getting in touch with my friend who worked on the film. I think I'll be able to get you an outline from him of what it was like on the production. I was just there for one night when they filmed the family driving away from the house at the end of show and the street was lined with coffins. I haven't watched the movie in years but I remember a girl running up to a car and then the car with the family driving down the street. There was also an ILM matte unit filming some BG plates for effects that night. They photographed all this on a real street, not in a studio, which is why I could stand around and watch. I know that Spielberg directed everything that night anyway because I was standing rather close to him much of the time. I'll get back in touch when I have more detailed info from my friend.
Update: 9/20/10-This site did an article on the "who really directed it" controversy: http://www.top10films.co.uk/archives/3283
In the comments section below was this post:
Horror Writer said: At Necon, a horror writing conference, in the mid eighties, I was present when “The Fury” author John Farris spoke at length about being on set [of "Poltergeist"], and said, point blank, that “Tobe Hooper was coked to the gills” during the shoot, which is why Speilberg took over — although contractually it had to be Hooper listed as director. Prior to this the rumor mill was rife with reason after another, and cocaine was chief among them. Farris confirmed it.
Update: 10-9-10
I asked source "Ben There" the following on the Spielberg fan site PlayMountain.net (Ben now goes by the name of "Teen Herb"):
http://www.playmountain.net/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=c3843088727c0fb8c88e7410d8d75740&topic=94.60
I asked:  Since you were on set, can you speak at all to the rumors (from multiple sources) that Tobe had a, shall we say, "issue" with cocaine use? And did that problem contribute to Spielberg's "taking over" the film?
"Ben":  Hi David, it's been a while. I hope all is well with you and yours. Thank you for adding so much to the whole Poltergeist discussion through your own dedicated research.

Actually, I did, already, speak to those rumors, but that was years ago back at SF. com. Just recently, by private email, I told one fellow Playmountaineer that, IMO, Tobe exhibited a sober demeanor and that I'd not seen him have so much as a beer to drink - but I was talking about the, approximate, ten week "prep" period before we started principal photography. Bear in mind, that, up until the first day of shooting, everyone believed Tobe was, in fact, our director. During the shoot, however, Tobe, myself, and C.T. Nelson did quaff quite a few beers on just one particular night...after wrapping, of course. As well, in celebration of our last night of shooting, Tobe, myself, and a few others did imbibe a bit o' the bubbly. Still, even on those two occasions I would not say that Tobe was overtly inebriated.

I don't know that Tobe had any "issue" with cocaine, but from the late 70's to about the late 80's, cocaine use was quite common to most (Hollywood) cast and crew members. Having 'Ben There,' I can honestly tell you that I never saw Tobe exhibit any tell-tale sign of cocaine use. IMO, Steven took the reigns for the simple reason that Tobe made poor decisions and was much too slow to make any decision at all.
Another poster said:

Hooper made a statement regarding his directing the movie, just some weeks ago:

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2010/08/27/tobe-hooper-busts-spielberg-poltergeist-myth/

 

 

In response, Ben noted:

 

 

Apparently, Tobe's memory from the time of Poltergeist's filming has been completely erased. It's either that or he's just turned into the proverbial "liar, liar, pants on fire," but it is, literally, one or the other.

As "Ben There," I previously relayed accurate portrayals of what took place from the beginning to the end on Poltergeist. Again, just to keep the record straight, I will lend truth and insight to these (and any other) false claims as made by Hooper, Spielberg, or any other source.

(So, according to that article:) 'Legendary film director Tobe Hooper graced the FrightFest stage a few minutes ago. During his chat with Total Film, he spoke about the myth surrounding Spielberg’s on-set contributions to Poltergeist. A writer from the L.A. Times visited the set while they were filming some backyard scenes and Spielberg was shooting 2nd unit footage in an over-the-shoulder angle of remote control cars. The Times didn’t consider that this might only be 2nd unit, which is how the Big Story got started in the first place.'

Okay, yet again, here's the real Big Story: Our very first shot, on the very first day of principal photography took place on a hilltop overlooking the area that was Cuesta Verde. It was the scene where James Karen offers an already frazzled C.T. Nelson a higher position within the real estate firm. Tobe's decisions were tentative beyond belief, and it took him a ridiculously long time just to decide the blocking of that scene... so Spielberg jumped in and did it for him. Having taken that initial step, Spielberg - not Hooper -  immediately and forever found himself answering all pertinent questions from both cast and crew.

Upon completing that scene, our company moved down to the Freeling house. I do not recall the specific scene or shots in the backyard, but it was simple work in that it did not involve mechanical/visual effects or any stunt work. ("Tweety's" burial scene in a cigar box comes to mind as that was one of the very few scenes I recall Tobe calling "Action!") Now, the scene with Dirk Blocker peddling 6-packs o' beer on a bmx bicycle was NOT a "2nd Unit" shot. In shooting those backyard and frontyard scenes simultaneoulsy, we were simply trying to pick up the time as was squandered by Hooper back on the hilltop.

Worth noting, is that the kids who cause Blocker to crash the bike via their remote controlled cars are NOT in the final draft of the script. Spielberg suggested those kids and their cars as merely an afterthought... and very much a last minute afterthought, at that.

(Furthermore, according to that article:) 'In fact, Spielberg was prepping ET, and wasn’t really on the Poltergeist set that much. (Hooper) also asserted that Poltergeist was definitely his baby: he designed it, he directed it, and it had his “feel.”'

The only part of the above that is true is that, yes, Spielberg was prepping E.T. during Poltergeist's period of principal photography. Hooper is absolutely delusional to claim that Speilberg "wasn't really on the Poltergeist set that much." Poltergeist was "Hooper's baby," but only during pre-production. From it's first shot to its last shot, it was no more Hooper's baby than mine.

 

 

Josh Asked:

Considering there was a lot of stuff that was different in the final draft, it would seem that the film was a bit of a monotonous production. From your true experience, would you say that?

 

No, not in the least. Poltergeist was a most spontaneous film production and, in fact, it was often quite maddening in that regard. On day-1 of shooting, the key crew personnel were ready to shoot the film they had prepared with Tobe Hooper. By lunch-time of day-1, that whole concept was completely out the window.

 

 

Quote from: Shimrod on October 06, 2010, 03:57:10 AM

Should have mentioned that I don't believe Hooper on this one. Just wanted to point out that he made that statement again.

 

No problem, Shimrod - as the messenger you're fine. You have to remember, however, these "statements" are older than the movie itself, and I, for one, believe it's high time to stop this ridiculous travesty. In pre-production, Poltergiest had one director; in principal photography and post production, Poltergeist had a different director. That's just the way it was, and it's just the way it will always be.

 

 

Josh asked:

I was wondering... the vision that Hooper was planning for Poltergeist... was it incredibly different from what Spielberg did when he took over, or did it just vary in tone?

 

Of course, Tobe's version would have been quite different, but it's hard to know how different. I'm just spitballing here, but I figure his would have been darker in tone, and lighter in suspense. For an example, I imagine his version of the clown doll would have been stubbier and a little less friendly in appearance - still smiling, mind you, but in a way that tipped off the audience right from the get-go. I also think Tobe's version of the Freelings would have tended more toward the Adams Family than to the Brady Bunch. Such, however, would not necessarily render an inferior film... just a different film.
 

Quote from: Josh Kelhoffer on October 06, 2010, 06:03:39 AM

Were the tasks planned for your department to do completely changed that first day?

 

Certainly, that was my immediate fear, and on that first day I half jokingly asked Steven if I'd prepared the film with the wrong person. He said that he would work with whatever Tobe had already decided. (I'm sure that was not an intentional fib, but it certainly did not work out that way.)
 

Quote from: Josh Kelhoffer on October 06, 2010, 06:03:39 AM

It's somewhat sad that most of the information you can find on Poltergeist... is (only) in newspaper and magazine articles from 1982. Occasionally, an interview pops up. But really, there isn't enough and a lot of this really should be on the DVD.

 

From the beginning, I criticized the media for intentionally perpetuating this lie. Not once did I ever read an article where they flat-out asked Tobe or Steven who, exactly, it was that called "action" and "cut;" who, exactly, answered all pertinent questions from the cast and crew. In the end, Spielberg's somewhat effusive but evasive responses were just as misleading as Tobe's own claim to be Poltergeist's one, true, director.

And that's what makes Reardon's recent comment in that magazine so curious and disappointing. To wit: "I never saw him (Spielberg) say 'action' or 'cut' – Tobe did that." To be sure, Reardon also allowed: "The nature of my job had me in a workshop for a lot of the shoot." In fact, Reardon was rarely on-set. As well, in fact, on rare occasions, Tobe did call "action/cut." With tongue firmly in cheek, then, Reardon could claim that his rare on-set visits actually coincided with Tobe's rare calls of "action/cut." Still, his comments are quite misleading.

After all that has been said and done on this issue, there are still legitimate reasons for the controversy to remain, forever, open. Do not expect any definitive closure from either Hooper or Spielberg.