Urman replies on "Zoo"

email this story
read comments (27)
post a comment

ThinkFilm honcho Mark Urman resented last night's post about Zoo and wrote the following: "Zoo, if you really want to know, is extremely artsy, totally un-sensationalistic, and 100% 'specialty.' Alas -- writers insist upon calling it 'the horse-fucking movie' and talking about it in tabloid terms, and flinging it at a broad-based audience that is not equipped to meet it on its own terms."

I wrote back straight away and said "the only touchstone I have in the naked male-stimulated-by-horse genre of drama is Equus. Does Zoo touch upon any of the themes and/or musings in Peter Shaffer's play?

"When people spoke of Equus in shorthand in the '70s, they said (a) it was about an unstable stable boy who blinds three or four horses, and (b) it has great performances and (c) it has a nude scene in the stable between the boy and a girl. People think and relate in shorthand. You're far too savvy and perceptive not to have understood from the get-go that this movie would be processed as a thing about horse sex. A guy dying from anal intercourse with a horse is a tabloid subject -- it's a story that's straight out of Weekly World News."

To which Urman replied, "Zoo has larger themes, but not quite the same as Shaffer's. Equus explores the passion of Alan Strang (who was in fact mad) and compares it , somewhat romantically, to the dry, rationalism of the shrink. Zoo is the sad, strange-but-true story of someone who explores his dark side and gets lost in the darkness. But the film does not romanticize the passion in question, nor does it imply that it's comparable to, superior to, or even related to normal adult male urges.

"And while I fully expect people to refer to this -- and any -- film in somewhat reductive terms, I think that 'the horse-fucking' movie is a phrase that not even the Weekly World News would use!"

"Find Me Guilty" tenacity<< previous | next >>Off to Sundance

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on January 17, 2007 at 11:34 AM

comment #1

kyle21 says ...

Why would anyone even care what ThinkFilm says or does considering how they treat films and artists. Take Shortbus and Candy as examples. They cannot be trusted.

Posted by kyle21 at January 17, 2007 12:03 PM

comment #2

le corbeau says ...

"Zoo is the sad, strange-but-true story of someone who explores his dark side and gets lost in the darkness."

It could happen to any of us!

Posted by le corbeau at January 17, 2007 12:07 PM

comment #3

StewartforPresident says ...

I think he might actually be upset that you did not refer to the movie correctly.

It should be described as "fucking-horse movie" not a "horse-fucking movie"

Posted by StewartforPresident at January 17, 2007 12:18 PM

comment #4

dre says ...

some stories i dont care to be told

Posted by dre at January 17, 2007 12:20 PM

comment #5

Nate Ford says ...

kyle 21...

while it's true we might all have a dark side, most don't involve an erection and a barnyard animal, at least not outside of oklahoma.

Posted by Nate Ford at January 17, 2007 12:57 PM

comment #6

corey3rd says ...

That's a pretty romantic looking poster. Genet would put it up in his hotel room.

And if it's "totally un-sensationalistic" what's the point? You're telling me that the horse fucking the guy to death is just a simple little side note? This film is all sensationalism. And the only reason it is "artsy" is to defend its subject matter from it just being a piece of Youtube snuff. But deep down, this movie is "Jackass" except instead of a toy car being shoved up a guy's butt, it's a horse's dong. The people that buy tickets for this film will be the same audience who saw Borat to experience the fat hairy guy's sack on Borat's face. I daresay that this film will receive zero interest from the Blue Hairs that are going to see The Queen this weekend.

Thinkfilm needs to ignore their name and sell this movie as what it is: A Faces of Death for the 21st Century.

Do they get to put up the "no animals were harmed in the making of this movie" disclaimer?

Posted by corey3rd at January 17, 2007 1:05 PM

comment #7

lesterg says ...

The film may be "un-sensationalistic" but something tells me that sensationalism/media outrage is exactly what ThinkFilms is counting on to market the film.

I love that the guy is angry at Jeff for giving them a title that's almost guaranteed to sell more tickets..."Horse Fucking: The Movie" would earn double "Zoo"'s take at the box-office.

Posted by lesterg at January 17, 2007 1:55 PM

comment #8

Edward says ...

'"Zoo is the sad, strange-but-true story of someone who explores his dark side and gets lost in the darkness."

It could happen to any of us!'

I've been down some dark paths which didn't include any animals. Not sure if this has any interest for me, but a great poster.

Posted by Edward at January 17, 2007 1:59 PM

comment #9

Rich S. says ...

An interesting poster, it may be, but go to Amazon and check out the DVD cover for Equus.

Posted by Rich S. at January 17, 2007 2:06 PM

comment #10

JD says ...

I think the critics fail ThinkFilm releases more than ThinkFilm does. Two of the best films I saw last year -- Down in the Valley and The King -- were released by ThinkFilm and I failed to see either in the theatre because critics were so lukewarm about both. How these genuinely complex, challenging, and inventive films could be pushed aside in favour of enjoyable, yet utterly conventional fluff like The Queen is beyond me. If you ask me, the critical establishment is in disarray.

Posted by JD at January 17, 2007 2:16 PM

comment #11

jeffmcm says ...

I think it's stupid to insist on comparing this movie to Equus, especially since noone has seen it. It's like insisting on comparing Pan's Labyrinth with Jim Henson's Labyrinth because they both feature labyrinths. Different things, okay?

They probably do get to put 'no animals were harmed' because (a) I doubt there is any actual footage of the central event of this film, and (b) the horse was not harmed, which was why nobody was prosecuted for said event.

Posted by jeffmcm at January 17, 2007 2:24 PM

comment #12

Craig Kennedy says ...

Let's just marvel for a moment over how, up until this event, it was perfectly legal in Washington (and I expect many other places) to get boned by a farm animal.

(Pause for quiet contemplation)

Wells is being rather close minded for so quickly deciding what the film was going to be like but do any of us really count on him to be some kind of vanguard for edgy, independent cinema? I don't. On the other hand, the ThinkFilm guy is either being disingenuous or stupid when he expresses shock over the reductive thinking about the documentary. Is the film NOT about a guy who died by horse penis?

I wouldn't care to rush into the judgment that it's automatically sensationalist though either. A sensational subject for sure, but there can be value to probing (no pun intended....ok maybe a little) the darkest depths of human behavior. Just because that behavior is shocking, doesn't automatically mean the film's only draw is one of titillation.

Am I going to see it? I doubt it.

Posted by Craig Kennedy at January 17, 2007 2:58 PM

comment #13

Joe Leydon says ...

CJ Kennedy: The great Lenny Bruce had a routine in which he explained that the only reason there are laws against interspecies sex is -- well, at some point, someone was caught having interspecies sex. So if there is a law aginst sex with a horse -- whether the horse is the fucker or the fucked -- it's because, well, someone got caught in the stable with his pants down.

Posted by Joe Leydon at January 17, 2007 3:13 PM

comment #14

Craig Kennedy says ...

Joe, yes I suppose it would be a strange law to be ahead of the curve on. Who's going to send that one to the House floor?

Posted by Craig Kennedy at January 17, 2007 3:15 PM

comment #15

Bilge says ...

If ZOO is anything like Devor's very contemplative and impressionistic POLICE BEAT, then it will be very artsy indeed. The subject matter is certainly outrageous, but the director is definitely not the kind of dude that's going to deliver JACKASS-style tabloid fodder.

That said, I have no idea what to expect, and am kind of amazed ThinkFilm has already bought it. (POLICE BEAT, which is quite good, never found a distributor.)

Posted by Bilge at January 17, 2007 3:26 PM

comment #16

Joe Leydon says ...

I'll take your horse-fucking movie, and raise it with a tiger-fucking movie.

http://www.dsdvds.com/index.php?act=viewProd&productId=395

Posted by Joe Leydon at January 17, 2007 3:27 PM

comment #17

Noah says ...

Speaking of tiger-fucking movies, how about Passion in the Desert? I'm surprised nobody mentioned that...actually, I'm not surprised. That movie sucked.

Posted by Noah at January 17, 2007 3:44 PM

comment #18

EDouglas says ...

ryan, I'm not sure what you're referring to re THINKFilm in regards to Candy/Shortbus. I don't think either movie would play in Peoria, so if you expected them to open much wider than L.A., NY and other big cities, it just wasn't going to happen (and they knew that). THINKFilm held full press junkets for both movies here in NY and have doneso with most of their movies this year, which was not something they had done regularly in past years.

Posted by EDouglas at January 17, 2007 4:33 PM

comment #19

Nick Rogers says ...

Ah, Edward, but "Shortbus" DID play in Peoria.

Posted by Nick Rogers at January 17, 2007 5:02 PM

comment #20

le corbeau says ...

Every time I open this page and see that detail of the horse-fucking movie poster, I think at first it's Chucky.

Posted by le corbeau at January 17, 2007 5:27 PM

comment #21

corey3rd says ...

so instead of using the 100s of hours of videofootage of the guys having sex with the horses, the director used actors to "recreate" the touching moments - shouldn't this film really be considered a drama?

And what is the point of putting together a film that doesn't give us the goods. what's the point of paying $10 to see actors lurking around the barn?

Thinkfilm better have a better marketing plan than what I'm seeing because anytime you have to start out by telling me what a film isn't and doesn't have, you've pretty much lost me as a paying customer.

Posted by corey3rd at January 17, 2007 5:39 PM

comment #22

Griff says ...

Sorry, I have Jeff's back (so to speak) on this one. Man dies having sex with horse. Let's give an entire film to the poor sad deluded son of a bitch, and the subculture that spawned it. Is it too much to suggest that there are better subjects for a film? Or, rather, is it easier to make a "shocking, cutting edge film about the dark paths," (which allows us to voyeuristically shake our heads and cluck our tongues, while wallowing in the sordidness) than to make an authentically uplifting film that ennobles the viewer, and fills their hearts with beauty?

Posted by Griff at January 17, 2007 5:45 PM

comment #23

lesterg says ...

"Thinkfilm better have a better marketing plan than what I'm seeing because anytime you have to start out by telling me what a film isn't and doesn't have, you've pretty much lost me as a paying customer."

Doubtful, ThinkFilms' marketing department makes Magnolia's look competent.

Posted by lesterg at January 17, 2007 6:15 PM

comment #24

jeffmcm says ...

Griff, my point is that for all we know, this film does indeed 'ennoble the viewer and fill their heart with beauty'. I agree that _probably_ it's dumb and sensationalistic, since it seems to have been made awfully quick, but rejecting something purely based on subject matter is what a snob or a dilettante does.

And honestly, when was the last time you saw a movie that 'ennobles the viewer and fills their heart with beauty'? Please.

Posted by jeffmcm at January 17, 2007 8:26 PM

comment #25

Griff says ...

Jeffmcm: you've made my point. It's much easier to make sensationalist crap (careers for Tarantino and others) than to do the really heavy lifting that creating beauty and nobility require.

Posted by Griff at January 18, 2007 10:47 AM

comment #26

Webster says ...

Saw "Zoo" last night. Beautifully filmed ... but ... the voiceover is ... so ... slow ... it's like people breathe between sentences ... a little piano music tinkles in ... then it's on to the next thought.

At the end of the day ... kinda empty ... lots of guys with mustaches and questionable peccadilos ...

Funniest moment: the guy who plays the fuckee was at the screening ... there's a signature role for you ....

Posted by Webster at January 21, 2007 6:56 AM

comment #27