Jeremy Kasten was introduced to the genre with the 2001 mind-bending horror flick starring Seth Green, entitled The Attic Expeditions. The film proved that he was someone to keep an eye on, and in the span of a handful of years, would bring us a few new films and an upcoming remake called The Wizard of Gore. Now's your chance to read how his career began and where it has taken him thus far. Enjoy!

CONDUCTED BY: Dan AKA Master of Horror
EDITED BY: FrighT MasteR
ORIGINALLY POSTED ON: 7/08/07

Let's talk a bit about how you got into the film business and why you chose to be a director.

It has really started to sound like the stereotypical answer from the current generation of directors to say that they’ve always wanted to be filmmakers, but that really is the case with me. I grew up making movies, and, truth be told, I was not very talented at much else. Not that I’m a genius at making movies. I do think there is such a huge balance between being good with people, being kinda P.T. Barnum, and being very geeky that makes for a good filmmaker. Those qualities I think I’ve got.

I came out to Los Angeles during college, having already PA’ed on a big movie and I’d seen (and been shocked to see) guys my dad’s age assistant editing and waiting for their shot to cut a movie. I knew my path to directing would be through post production, editing specifically. So I sorta made my mind up to come out here and work on low budget films where the opportunity to become an editor and director would happen sooner.

Were there any specific directors you feel may have influenced you?

Yes. But every time I answer this question an hour later or when I read it I think of 20 directors I left off. Mervyn leRoy, Jacques Tourner, Tod Browning, John Waters, H.G. Lewis, Dario Argento, Joderowsky, Cronenberg, the list can and does go on and on.

Your first film, The Attic Expeditions, has been hailed by fans and considered to be your best work yet -- why do you think that is?

It is absolutely my best film up until “The Wizard of Gore”. The reason for that is actually quite simple: On “Attic” I was on my own, creatively. I conceived of and developed the script with the writer, raised the financing and I was a producer on it. Despite the insanely low budget (we all slept in that house making the movie, painted sets ourselves with donated paint, are barely edible foods out of an infested kitchen, it was ridiculous) the creative force behind the film was unmuddled.

Also, we sort of shot the film until it was done. Meaning, that although technical problems ate away at my days (cranes that took all day to be constructed and were STILL missing intrigral pieces, short ends of film to shoot on that wouldn’t allow Jeff Combs to get through an entire monologue) I was able to expand the schedule to fit the movie. I’ve never had that again.

So if there are problems and one day’s worth of shooting ends up with an hour and a half to get it all done (which happened on “The Wizard of Gore”) I’ve had to live with it and not come back to finish the work. The 30 day shooting schedule over four years helped me a ton.

“All Souls Day: Dia De Los Muertos” and “The Thirst” were films I was HIRED to direct for a company that makes movies. Naturally, making a film under those circumstances is, well, just very different.

“The Wizard of Gore” was my baby from the start. I had wanted to do this since I first became obsessed with H.G. Lewis at a very young age. I think my obsession with “The Wizard of Oz” was met perfectly with my obsession with horror in “The Wizard of Gore”. I just dug the whole weirdness of his movie.

Also, it seems worth mentioning that “Attic” really seems to be aging well. It came out seven years ago and I started shooting it four years before that. The initial audience reaction (on-line, anyway) was not so warm. I think, often, it’s the fans that write frustrated reviews initially upon release that are the aggressively bad, mean-spirited review and the audiences that see the film over time seem to be the ones who actually like the movie.

How did "Attic" finally come together? Was it an easy venture?

“Attic” was anything but easy. Simply raising the 30 grand we shot the first 18 days with took a few years. The entire four years I raised money and shot the film over was absolute hell for me. Emotionally; physically. All around. We stuck to it and keep fighting to get the film finished and I think it paid off.

Currently, you're working on a remake of H.G. Lewis' Wizard of Gore. How do you feel about working on a remake especially now that they're so controversial amongst genre fans?

Good question. Next question? Kidding. I really do understand the frustration with the remake madness. I love horror movies, too, and I love original ideas. That being said, I prefer to think of what we’ve done with “Wizard” as a cover rather than a remake. I have seen many versions of Hamlet where the era it takes place in, the dialogue, even the approach to what is at the root of the story, those elements all change. Similarly, I think sometimes moves can be rejiggered to work in a different way - the way a cover song works. I love the remake of “The Thing” and “Invasion of the Bodysnatchers” tons, even though the original films have merit. Over time the good remakes will be remembered and the bad ones will be forgotten.

The cast in the Wizard of Gore remake reads like a small "Who's Who" of cult & horror cinema including Crispin Glover, Jeff Combs and Brad Dourif. How has it been working with all of them?

Incredible. Everyone I got in this movie is basically who I wanted for the roles. I don’t think that happens often on HUGE films, much less small genre films.

Why Crispin Glover as Montag?

You’re kidding right? The reason to cast Crispin as Montag is that there are three, maybe four actors in the universe that seem like they’d be worth remaking the film with… and at least one of those actors is dead. Crispin (or the person that we, as the public, believe Crispin to be) is everything Montag should be. Mysterious, artistic, dark and a little crazy.

Do you see this film getting a limited theatrical run or will it be going direct-to-DVD?

I am praying for it to come out in theatres. We’ll see. I think it has as good a chance as any other film in its budget range.

Do you feel that it has the capacity to surpass the original?

Surpass is a hard word for me. I don’t know if it will surpass the original in the ways Lewis’ film was groundbreaking. There was so much that hadn’t been done in movies up to that time. I hope that we push the boundaries of what people have FELT in movies by going uglier, darker, and deeper into madness. I hope the film surprises people. That is what I hope for.

Name some of your favorite films.

Too many films to mention but here are a few: Alucarda, 120 days of Sodom, The Exorcist, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Descent, The Ninth Configuration, Brain Dead, Meet the Feebles, Helstrom Chronicle, Parents, A Clockwork Orange, Suspiria, Exorcist 3, Caged Virgins, Curse of the Demon, David & Lisa, All Mondo Movies.

Recently, your film The Thirst saw a DVD release and has received some pretty decent feedback from the horror community. How did that film come about?

CFQ gave me the script to read and asked if I was interested. I was interested in making a vampire film that didn’t fit in the mode of most vampire movies. We tried to go in a different direction.

Do you feel you managed to bring something new to the sub-genre?

Like I said, I tried. There were many cooks in the kitchen and I struggled to keep the film on track. Some stuff came off derivative and I couldn’t fight every fight and there simply wasn’t the schedule and time to push to make everything perfect in the script before we shot. I do think the thing I most wanted to play with, the idea that the parallel to addiction is direct, and that the couple in question are actually in “the program” and struggling with their sobriety BEFORE they enter the afterlife, that part I think is bolder and cooler in my movie. I am particularly fond of the “kicking” scene, too.

The characters in the film were incredibly distinct in comparison to many vampire flicks we see today. There was a gritty, dirty subculture feel to it -- why that direction?

It speaks to me. I was never really accepted or that into any particular “scene” but I do love to be surrounded by them – scenes – groups of people with a common interest that is urban – or pretends to be. Whether its punk, industrial, fetish, whatever. I just like being with the “cool” kids – or, if you prefer, the outsiders. I tried to bring a little of the aesthetic to the movie because I can never relate to horror movies about nice, well dressed kids who have parties that look like suburban frat parties from beach blanket bingo movies contemporized. I think it makes movies smell like they were directed by grandpas.

What kind of advice could you give people interested in becoming directors?

You absolutely MUST just take a leap of faith on some level and try to do it and keep trying until you’re done with a film. Repeat as necessary to feel satisfied or dead.

There really is no substitute for gumption. I know too many people who wanted to be directors and waited for someone else to give them that chance. That may happen, I’m sure it does, but creating the opportunity yourself seems like a much more likely way to get to make a movie to me.

25 years from now, when you look back at your career, what do you think you'll say?

I hope I’ll feel that I made some really cool fucking movies.