David Byron, author, owner of NVF Magazine, and filmmaker has just released the trailer for his new documentary Hot and Horrifying, featuring women who work and live in the horror industry - to go along with a book release of the same title. If it looks slightly similar to the documentary by Reyna Young about the exact same topic entitled Welcome to my Darkside - well, that's because it is. Except Byron's film's title seems to suggest a slightly more, er, sex-oriented film and may be for a different audience - one that just wants to look at hot chicks.
We're going to have PMS, get our panties in a bunch, and start being humorless feminists again in a second (yes, fellows, I have heard it all) but all I really want to say is this: If the film is about women, why aren't they getting the credit they deserve?
The women involved are all great and gorgeous actresses, (the trailer shows Devanny Pinn, Brooke Lewis, Tara Cardinal) and there seem to be some writers (? not sure, no one is given a name credit on the trailer), but the quality of the content and the cinematography will be glaringly inconsistent because each woman was asked to film and send in her own footage. That's right, Byron didn't shoot them himself, the women shot their own interviews. And they aren't being given credit as directors (an issue we also have with Young's film.) In fact, he didn't even give them specific guidelines on what to talk about or do - he just said something to the extent of 'shoot yourself doing something, include some sexy stuff, and then send it to me'. How do I know? Because I was asked to participate in this project, as were several close actress friends of mine. I also was interviewed in his book Queens of Scream, which was created the same way as the book version of Hot and Horrifying.
Not because I'm a fucking uptight old feminist bitch do I complain (though clearly one could make an argument for all of those things), but because I don't think its right to ask people to submit free footage of themselves, in sexy or suggestive settings some of the time, for free when they receive no director or producer credit and no compensation for their appearance as 'sex symbols' to sell the movie. I think there's nothing wrong with being in a documentary, or being hot in a film, but if the guy making it is using your sex to sell that film - Baby, you oughtta be getting paid. Or you oughtta be getting credit for the camera work, art direction, and writing that you took the time to create to be a part of the movie. That's what irks me.
Also, I think this is just a sexy fun-time movie masquerading as a documentary about women working in horror. A movie about women working in horror is bound to cost more and be far more boring than this.
Incidentally, Byron's accompanying book Hot and Horrifying consists of cut and paste interviews that were emailed to each woman and emailed back, largely unedited before publishing, just like Byron's previous book on women in horror Queens of Scream; a minimal amount of work for Byron for both the book and the film with maximum creative credit. Not so cool.
Don't get me wrong - Byron isn't a bad person. He's just trying to write a book without writing a book and make a documentary without shooting any film, and because we're dealing with actresses and women it hasn't occurred to him or to his publishers that this may not be ethical or respectful, or even indicative of a consistent end product.
Check out the new trailer for Hot and Horrifying and judge for yourself:
1KW, you make some very good points, and I am glad you make them. Having opposing opinions next to mine makes this site seem more intellectual and the comments become part of the overall article itself rather than just commentary on an existing piece.
I think I may be irked because I was asked to participate, and when I was, I was irked that someone would ask me to do all that work (camera-getting, art direction, scene writing, etc.) and then just 'submit' it to him, and he would get the overall credit. I felt like I was being asked to work really hard to be in a piece that promoted him as a filmmaker, when in fact, the women are really 'making' the film.
I also found the title beyond stupid and I told him he should think about changing it to something less ... stupid. I guess he ignored my suggestion.
He did provide general guidelines like 'Talk about stuff about you, and also try to be a little sexy' (paraphrasing exact same meaning of his words) which I think is weird. It's a documentary, and shouldn't that show actuality (I mean, unless you're Michael Moore) instead of contrived sexuality?
I got the impression that he wanted it to be like one of those fake Playboy documentaries you see late at night (I mean, I have 'heard' of them, er) where they have a girl bouncing on her bed, being sexy, making PB&J sandwiches, then dancing while putting on her underwear... you know.
I just wish that the women in the film had just shot their own segments and then released them on their OWN sites or their own Youtube account, or whatever, and gotten the same amount of promotion/attention, with far more control, since it isn't really going to benefit any of them to be in a 'David Byron' film.
On a whole other note, I agree with Bigmac and think it is a really bad, untalented, disrespectful to the audience and actors, way to make a documentary. It isn't as if the women were on the space station and this was the only way to get an interview with them. This is a quickie, cheapie way to make one and it will make the people who appeared in it look bad rather than good. That's my opinion. And that's why I didn't want to be in it.
Well, I have to agree the title is playing up the titillation angle, but I'm thinking this film is trying to sell itself to the fanboys out there who think the only thing women do in horror is get naked and are stalked by slashers.
*heavy sigh*
The trailer makes it look like some kind of video publicity packet, and a rather boring one at that. The longest clip (in which the dubbing was off), of the actress gushing out her thanks to the production company and the director for making the film, really annoyed me to no end.
And having the "interviews" being written and directed by the subjects is a terrible way to make a documentary. I suspect this movie is just a bunch of rambling sequences, with no cohesive thread or point of view, about how the women who sent clips in love being in horror films, love their fans and other such nonsense.
That's why you can't rely on random clips without a set series of questions. An interviewer is needed not only to focus the discussion and shape the "story" or "plot" of the documentary, but also keep things on track.
I don't know about giving the ladies directing credit, but the idea of making a documentary in this fashion feels cheap, disrespectful and unethical. Primarily to the women in the film, but also to the fans who would watch it.
I can't really tell much based on that trailer. Technically, it is a film by Byron, like the credit says on the trailer, because (I assume) he was the one who put the whole thing together. In other words, there wouldn't have been any actress interviews or movie without him. Since you have access to the knowledge that these women are speaking their own words and are filming themselves, I'll also assume that Byron is being forthright about that aspect of the film. If he's being forthright about that fact, then he's not doing anything wrong in that regard. It may go against what some consider to be a pure documentary, but that's about it. Also, I have to assume (since I have nothing to go on besides this trailer) that these actresses knew what they were doing - chances are there was a contract involved that they had to read and sign.
In a perfect world the women should be getting paid for their efforts, but even that becomes tricky when you consider that there's a decent chance this film won't even make any real money. No offense to the actresses involved (and despite the legit-looking MPAA rating at the beginning), but this flick looks very low budget. In fact, it kind of looks like it cost 0 dollars to make. Now, what I think probably happened (again, assuming), is that Byron and the actresses figured that the movie was going to be a low key affair, and that the actresses simply wanted the exposure that would come along with the film's public release. I don't know for sure, but I imagine that neither Byron nor the actresses count on this thing making money. If they do, they're very optimistic. In the event that it does somehow become a hot item and reap millions (or even thousands), THEN the question of "why aren't these girls getting paid" becomes a critical one.
I honestly didn't get the impression from the trailer alone that this film was in any way exploitative. The fact that the actresses filmed themselves kind of negates exploitation, as each actress will be exactly as sexy as she feels like being when she films herself - from the trailer it looked like some did feel like it and some didn't.
The only thing that bothers me about this trailer (when I try to look at it from your eyes, that is), is the title, Hot and Horrifying. That's a tacky, titilating title. But then again... most movie titles are tacky and titilating - they're trying to make money, and figure the best way to do that is grab as many horny males as possible and sit them down in front of the screen. Tacky, but typical.
Now, the one thing I do agree with is that the closing credits of this film should include the fact that these women filmed themselves. But we haven't seen the movie yet. For all we know, the credits do say that, or perhaps the movie addresses that fact in the footage itself. It seems as though the proper title for Byron would be "creator and editor", but that should be the proper title of most legitimate documentary film makers. The fact that the words belong to the subjects themselves is implied (as a documentary is real-life footage with no script).
Heidi, my natural inclination is to take your side, but in order for me to do that this time you'll have to help me out and explain what it is I'm missing here, what I'm not seeing or picking up on, because based on the trailer and your article I'm not getting it. Maybe I'm just not paying close enough attention, or making the wrong assumptions.
If I were a feminist, the thing that would have my "panties in a bunch" is the fact that a guy is in charge of this whole thing. But that frustration should be directed at the actresses themselves for not finding the motivation to put this thing together on their own. Because when a guy is in charge, it looks like another cliche "guy has to herd the sexy actresses into the pen to get anything done" documentary. That stings - even as a guy I realize that hurts, and paints a sad picture of the state of women in horror. Perhaps your article is (in a roundabout way) a battle cry to women to get off their butts and start taking charge? That I can get behind and fully support.
I can't fucking stand this new mode of documentary filmmaking where the subjects FILM THEMSELVES and someone else cobbles it together- or WOW, makes an "unedited" film. It's shitty on SO many levels, starting with yes, the fact that someone is taking credit for being the "director" when the subjects are directing themselves. Then add to that the fact that the women have to, you know pay for their own fucking postage to mail in tapes OR spend time and effort converting and uploading files. Top it all off with the disparate sound and light levels in each clip and you've got a shitty documentary. Dreadful.
I understand that people participate in these films to get their names out there, to get exposure...but they're really being taken advantage of at the same time.
Comments
1KW, you make some very good points, and I am glad you make them. Having opposing opinions next to mine makes this site seem more intellectual and the comments become part of the overall article itself rather than just commentary on an existing piece.
I think I may be irked because I was asked to participate, and when I was, I was irked that someone would ask me to do all that work (camera-getting, art direction, scene writing, etc.) and then just 'submit' it to him, and he would get the overall credit. I felt like I was being asked to work really hard to be in a piece that promoted him as a filmmaker, when in fact, the women are really 'making' the film.
I also found the title beyond stupid and I told him he should think about changing it to something less ... stupid. I guess he ignored my suggestion.
He did provide general guidelines like 'Talk about stuff about you, and also try to be a little sexy' (paraphrasing exact same meaning of his words) which I think is weird. It's a documentary, and shouldn't that show actuality (I mean, unless you're Michael Moore) instead of contrived sexuality?
I got the impression that he wanted it to be like one of those fake Playboy documentaries you see late at night (I mean, I have 'heard' of them, er) where they have a girl bouncing on her bed, being sexy, making PB&J sandwiches, then dancing while putting on her underwear... you know.
I just wish that the women in the film had just shot their own segments and then released them on their OWN sites or their own Youtube account, or whatever, and gotten the same amount of promotion/attention, with far more control, since it isn't really going to benefit any of them to be in a 'David Byron' film.
On a whole other note, I agree with Bigmac and think it is a really bad, untalented, disrespectful to the audience and actors, way to make a documentary. It isn't as if the women were on the space station and this was the only way to get an interview with them. This is a quickie, cheapie way to make one and it will make the people who appeared in it look bad rather than good. That's my opinion. And that's why I didn't want to be in it.
Well, I have to agree the title is playing up the titillation angle, but I'm thinking this film is trying to sell itself to the fanboys out there who think the only thing women do in horror is get naked and are stalked by slashers.
*heavy sigh*
The trailer makes it look like some kind of video publicity packet, and a rather boring one at that. The longest clip (in which the dubbing was off), of the actress gushing out her thanks to the production company and the director for making the film, really annoyed me to no end.
And having the "interviews" being written and directed by the subjects is a terrible way to make a documentary. I suspect this movie is just a bunch of rambling sequences, with no cohesive thread or point of view, about how the women who sent clips in love being in horror films, love their fans and other such nonsense.
That's why you can't rely on random clips without a set series of questions. An interviewer is needed not only to focus the discussion and shape the "story" or "plot" of the documentary, but also keep things on track.
I don't know about giving the ladies directing credit, but the idea of making a documentary in this fashion feels cheap, disrespectful and unethical. Primarily to the women in the film, but also to the fans who would watch it.
I can't really tell much based on that trailer. Technically, it is a film by Byron, like the credit says on the trailer, because (I assume) he was the one who put the whole thing together. In other words, there wouldn't have been any actress interviews or movie without him. Since you have access to the knowledge that these women are speaking their own words and are filming themselves, I'll also assume that Byron is being forthright about that aspect of the film. If he's being forthright about that fact, then he's not doing anything wrong in that regard. It may go against what some consider to be a pure documentary, but that's about it. Also, I have to assume (since I have nothing to go on besides this trailer) that these actresses knew what they were doing - chances are there was a contract involved that they had to read and sign.
In a perfect world the women should be getting paid for their efforts, but even that becomes tricky when you consider that there's a decent chance this film won't even make any real money. No offense to the actresses involved (and despite the legit-looking MPAA rating at the beginning), but this flick looks very low budget. In fact, it kind of looks like it cost 0 dollars to make. Now, what I think probably happened (again, assuming), is that Byron and the actresses figured that the movie was going to be a low key affair, and that the actresses simply wanted the exposure that would come along with the film's public release. I don't know for sure, but I imagine that neither Byron nor the actresses count on this thing making money. If they do, they're very optimistic. In the event that it does somehow become a hot item and reap millions (or even thousands), THEN the question of "why aren't these girls getting paid" becomes a critical one.
I honestly didn't get the impression from the trailer alone that this film was in any way exploitative. The fact that the actresses filmed themselves kind of negates exploitation, as each actress will be exactly as sexy as she feels like being when she films herself - from the trailer it looked like some did feel like it and some didn't.
The only thing that bothers me about this trailer (when I try to look at it from your eyes, that is), is the title, Hot and Horrifying. That's a tacky, titilating title. But then again... most movie titles are tacky and titilating - they're trying to make money, and figure the best way to do that is grab as many horny males as possible and sit them down in front of the screen. Tacky, but typical.
Now, the one thing I do agree with is that the closing credits of this film should include the fact that these women filmed themselves. But we haven't seen the movie yet. For all we know, the credits do say that, or perhaps the movie addresses that fact in the footage itself. It seems as though the proper title for Byron would be "creator and editor", but that should be the proper title of most legitimate documentary film makers. The fact that the words belong to the subjects themselves is implied (as a documentary is real-life footage with no script).
Heidi, my natural inclination is to take your side, but in order for me to do that this time you'll have to help me out and explain what it is I'm missing here, what I'm not seeing or picking up on, because based on the trailer and your article I'm not getting it. Maybe I'm just not paying close enough attention, or making the wrong assumptions.
If I were a feminist, the thing that would have my "panties in a bunch" is the fact that a guy is in charge of this whole thing. But that frustration should be directed at the actresses themselves for not finding the motivation to put this thing together on their own. Because when a guy is in charge, it looks like another cliche "guy has to herd the sexy actresses into the pen to get anything done" documentary. That stings - even as a guy I realize that hurts, and paints a sad picture of the state of women in horror. Perhaps your article is (in a roundabout way) a battle cry to women to get off their butts and start taking charge? That I can get behind and fully support.
I can't fucking stand this new mode of documentary filmmaking where the subjects FILM THEMSELVES and someone else cobbles it together- or WOW, makes an "unedited" film. It's shitty on SO many levels, starting with yes, the fact that someone is taking credit for being the "director" when the subjects are directing themselves. Then add to that the fact that the women have to, you know pay for their own fucking postage to mail in tapes OR spend time and effort converting and uploading files. Top it all off with the disparate sound and light levels in each clip and you've got a shitty documentary. Dreadful.
I understand that people participate in these films to get their names out there, to get exposure...but they're really being taken advantage of at the same time.