Part I
Movies
are a crucial battleground in the raging war on culture. The
enemy does not want to kill the audience; they want to take
us captive. Their weapons are images and ideas. They lure us
to their “killing fields” and keep us there for two hours in
the dark. Sometimes they assault us without equivocation — an
all-out frontal attack that bombards us with graphic depictions
of sexual encounters, violent acts and other horrors actual
or imagined. Sometimes they ambush us when we’ve been enticed
by other expectations. Increasingly they endeavor to subvert
us with clandestine propaganda. They plot to capture and convert
us not only by what they show and say but also by what they
premeditatively leave out.
Perfectly written
screenplays have turning points that propel
the characters from one act to the next. I’ve
tried not to look upon my life as a movie
because the 2nd Act is painfully
long and episodic, albeit wonderfully adventuresome.
However, in the ‘movie of my life’ the protagonist’s
goal remains steadfast though myriad wanderings.
The central dramatic question has remained
clear and unequivocal.
If my movie metaphor
has merit, one might consider that the turning
point leading to Act II was a feature film
I produced and directed called Windwalker…
and if you love anticipation, Act III begins
on November 9th, 2006.
Windwalker
opened to a flurry of critical acclaim when
it premiered in 1981. One noted critic called
it, “One of the Years Five Best Films”. Another said, “Windwalker brings
the best of A Man Called Horse, Jeremiah
Johnson, and Little Big Man together
into one intelligent, coherent story told
with a flair for authenticity. It is a visually
lush film that splits perfectly in half between
a love story and an action adventure.” Someone in Detroit declared, “Windwalker
deserves an Oscar.” I still love that
guy!
Early in my moviemaking
career a seasoned old pro warned me about
reviews. “Praise and criticism are both
imposters to be treated just the same.” But
I forgot my old friend’s advice because I
was hot and flying high. In the midst of being
flush with foolish pride I got a call from
“Hollywood”. They invited me to town.
Going Hollywood
Two talent agencies
wanted me to sign. I went with the smaller
one believing they would get to know me better
and understand my reluctance to “go Hollywood.”
Part of my agreement was a paragraph that
I insisted be in every contract. It disallowed
anyone from making changes to my films after
the Director’s cut that might “impact the
moral integrity of the picture.” My new agents
rolled their eyes but in the end agreed to
include the clause in every negotiation.
Almost immediately a publicist
rushed me from interview to interview and splattered my name
all over town. Farmington, Utah was never like this! In talking
to the press I was bold about my religion, candid about my family
and forthright in expressing my aspirations to make films that
embraced values and inspired as well as entertained.

Daily Variety,
dated Monday January 5, 1981, included this
headline, “Merrill Keeps His Faith, Decides
to Go Hollywood.” The full-page article
was most respectful and included, “An unusual
filmmaker in many respects, Merrill is a devout
member of the Mormon Church and lives near
S.F. with his family, which includes eight
children. He says he has tried to maintain
his beliefs and idealism within the often-brutal
world of commercial filmmaking. ‘My idealism
is tarnished like a fine piece of brass that
hasn’t lost any of its intrinsic value,’ Merrill
said.”
Within a few
weeks of signing with Film Artist’s Management,
I received a call from my agent. “Kieth
baby! We got you a great gig directing a feature
film! They loved Windwalker. They want
you man! You’re perfect for it! It’s a great
little coming of age picture. You’re going
to love it!” After ten years of struggling
to put my own projects together I was excited.
The script arrived.
It was called, They Came Without Eyes.
Hmmm? I curled up with the 105-page screenplay
by the pool and put on my sunglasses. “Hollywood
here I come.”
The story opened
with two teenagers fondling one another “writhing
about in passion” in the cab of an old
pickup truck parked on a lonely road. By the
end of the first page the script called for
the girl to be nearly naked with her bare
breasts exposed. By page two the teenagers
were engaged in fornication - graphically
described — and on page three — when the eyeless
creatures from the bowels of hell arrived
— the teenagers were sodomized and brutally
dismembered. (I apologize for these graphic
words but I am not making this up, it’s straight
from the script.)
By page four
I finally got it. It was my agent’s idea of
a joke! I could almost hear them laughing,
“Send the new Mormon guy the most offensive
script we can find.” I called them so
I could laugh along. “Very funny,”
I said. To my great shock I discovered it
was not intended as a joke.
“It’s great
isn’t it? Really gritty. Shall we tell them
you’re a go?”
I do not infer
that this singular experience is typical or
in any way a reliable generalization of what
goes on in Hollywood. But it really happened
and was my first real encounter with “Hollywood”
and is of course at least a shadow of what
is wrong with the thinking and ideology we
have come to associate with the motion picture
business.
Needless to say
my romantic affair “going Hollywood” was short
lived.
A Wonderful
25 Years
The 2nd Act – think
“metaphorical movie of my life” — stretched across 25 years
and a wonderful array of adventures in filmmaking. There were
highlights of course, Mr. Krueger’s Christmas,
Legacy and The Testaments — those rare films that
allowed me to combine who I am with what I do. There were some
wonderful television projects, a lot of writing and development,
other feature films and a comprehensive collection of IMAX movies
that took us to the far corners of the world. There was my movie
Amazon, of course, which took us deep into the rain forests
of Brazil and back to the Academy Awards with another Oscar
nomination.

My romance with
Hollywood was unrequited affection. But my
love of making motion pictures only deepened.
My passion to make movies that matter and
“feel-good-again” movies that enlighten, edify
and inspire as well as entertain has never
changed.
Another article
written during my Hollywood honeymoon came
from Linda Gross of the LA Times. The headline
was, “Merrill: The Maverick Film Maker.” I
will love Linda into the next life for her
description of me. “Merrill looks like
a cowboy-scholar. He is a tall, ruggedly handsome
man with burnt blond hair and larkspur blue
eyes. He wears Western jeans, cowboy boots
and a pensive grin.”
Linda would not
likely be so generous today. But though the
description may have changed the goals and
passion have endured. Linda explained, “Merrill
comes to Hollywood with the approach/avoidance
syndrome of the proverbial laboratory rat…He
is more comfortable shooting a film on location
in Monument Valley than he is in his agent’s
office on Sunset strip…Merrill has much in
common with John Ford, who happens to be one
of his filmmaking idols. Like Ford, Merrill’s
films celebrate the family, the land, justice
and sacrifice. His acceptance of the traditional
American ideals makes him something of a rarity
among modern filmmakers. So does his close
attachment to his own family and religion
(he is a practicing Mormon). Like Frank Capra,
the second of his spiritual movie mentors,
Merrill’s outlook is essentially optimistic
and he feels that a filmmaker should impart
a message of hope.”
The decision
to remain outside the Hollywood mainstream,
stay independent, reside in Northern California,
live without a Hollywood agent — and the
dubious opportunity to direct films like “They
Came Without Eyes” – and to pursue films
I could control and stories I could embrace
has been both challenging and miraculous.
I would choose no other path than the one
I have taken. We have been blessed with significant
success and instructive failures. We have
enjoyed a myriad of grand adventures. I say
“we” and “us” because my best friend/wife,
Dagny, has been in lock step all the way,
and of course most often our children came
along.
My goals have
remained unchanged — throughout the 2nd
Act of my life as it were — and it is
those same goals and passions that now take
me to ACT III. We have come to where we are
and once again consider Hollywood. This time
it is very different. This time we know each
other very well. This time it is not about
“going Hollywood” but rather looking for ways
to make the kind of movies that are increasingly
difficult – if not impossible – to get made
inside the Hollywood system.
Grand Movies
Not Made Today
The grand movies
I grew up on from directors John Ford and
Frank Capra would not likely be made in today’s
Hollywood. Capra’s classic, “It’s a Wonderful
Life” would surely get a “pass” from some
jaded reader in the lower echelon of the story
development department. A whole new generation
of talented young filmmakers who aspire to
tell great stories that embrace virtues and
values have nowhere to go to get their projects
made. The Hollywood system is not cordial
to family-friendly films.
It is wonderfully
ironic that following the phenomenal success
of Mel Gibson’s Passion of the Christ
Hollywood studios scrambled around looking
for ways to cash in on “the Christian market.”
“Fox Puts Faith
in Christian Films” headlined an article in the
LA times a few weeks ago. It is beyond ironic
that this company, who brings us such sordid
TV shows as “Nip/Tuck” and “Temptation Island”,
has decided to create a subsidiary called
Fox Faith to cash in on the Christians.
I suspect that at corporate headquarters they
haven’t a clue how to get from here to there.
They have already reached outside the system
in search of filmmakers who understand “that
market” and are willing to crank out a “faith-filled”
movie for five million bucks (whereas the
average Hollywood movie costs $61 million).
Hollywood has stumbled upon a huge neglected
audience in the mainstream market and they
poke at it with a long stick like a city slicker
confronting a diamond back rattlesnake. Amazing!
What Happened
to Hollywood?
So what happened
to Hollywood? Where have all the heroes gone?
What happened to those wonderful feel good
again stories we see so seldom any more? Why
is it so important we find alternative ways
to do battle in the movie fields of the cultural
wars?
“Hollywood” is
both noun and adjective. We love it or hate
it but hardly ever bother to define it. Hollywood
means different things to different people.
It is a place — a district of Los Angeles.
It is a style. It is a metonym for “the movie
business” — the American film and television
industry.
As a maker of
movies, as a member of the Academy of Motion
Picture Arts and Sciences and as a member
of the Director’s Guild of America I am part
of “Hollywood” in at least one of its many
connotations. As I am about to propose a diversionary
tactic in the cultural wars — of which Hollywood’s
liberal ideology is a weapon of potential
mass destruction — it is important for you
to understand what and whom I stand against
and whom I love and respect.
The popular face
of Hollywood is the actor scandal de jour
plastered on the covers of magazines that
frame every check out counter in America.
The public’s connection to that Hollywood
is an incomprehensible fascination with the
rich and famous. It can only be described
as a voyeuristic obsession with their often
shamefully immoral lives. Movie stars are
generic with Hollywood and Hollywood is generic
with movies. But I dare say that many if not
most of the people behind the cameras, the
ones who actually make the movies,
do not embrace the actions or ideologies that
masquerade in wondrous machinations among
the glamorous illuminati whose public face
is Hollywood.
Even the most
outrageous of the Hollywood movies are actually
made by pretty common folks. Carpenters, painters,
electricians, truck drivers, makeup artists,
architects, designers, computer programmers,
accountants, wranglers, artists, engineers,
costumers, cameramen, grips, editors, people
who fix food, serve coffee and clean up after
the horses together with an army of unskilled
laborers willing and anxious to do whatever
it takes to get into the business of making
movies and not to mention of course the thousands
of people who have never been — nor will ever
be in Hollywood — who work on animation and
computer graphics in places like China, India
and the Czech Republic. Most of these “movie-makers”
work hard. Have families. Love their kids.
Go to church or synagogue and do not identify
with the ideological assault on traditional
values and virtues that characterize so many
of the films on which they work to earn a
living.
But there is
another “Hollywood.” It is the Hollywood we
love to hate and the Hollywood that rightfully
deserves our wrath.
It is this “Hollywood”
that has become a synonym for an extreme liberal
ideology defined by a philosophy of secular
humanism, sexual promiscuity, gay marriage
(in fact the celebration of all things gay),
anti-religion, pro-abortion, anti traditional
family and some would argue, anti-American.
It is an ideology that is increasingly out
of touch with the traditional values of “mainstream
America” and millions of like-minded people
from many other countries.
Out of Touch
Curiously — and
inexplicably — it is also out of touch with
the values of the people who go to movies.
In a recent poll when asked if Hollywood reflected
their values, a whopping 70% of moviegoers
said, “no.” Only 10% said “sometimes.”
I find that astounding!
Writing in Movie Economics, David Grainger
put it this way, “If Hollywood were run like
a real business—instead of, say, like a clubby,
insecure, award-crazy, star-groveling high
school—where things like return on investment
mattered, there would be one unchallenged,
sacred principle that studio chieftains would
never violate: Make lots of G-rated movies.”
While 70% of
the audience feels Hollywood is out of touch
with our values the majority of the movies
are rated R. It makes no sense. In fact it
is astounding. It is astounding for one simple
reason: The audience is the most important
part of the motion picture business.
I need to repeat
that last phrase because I want this reality
to become part of your movie-lovers psyche:
The
motion picture audience is the
most
important part of the motion picture industry.
Through it’s
purchasing power, the audience holds the ultimate
power over the movie industry. Yet, we the
audience, by an overwhelming majority, feel
that Hollywood does not reflect our values.
The juxtaposition
of these two facts has brought me to a significant
conclusion. They have brought me to the turning
point that leads into Act III. They have become
the twin towers of a bold new idea that will
empower the audience, return virtues and values
to motion pictures, and create an alternative
source of wonderful feel-good-again major
motion pictures.
You
will hear more of this in the coming weeks.
Watch
for the announcement November 9.
Who or what is
this “Hollywood” that is so out of touch with
our values? Why is it they endeavor to subvert
us with clandestine propaganda? How do they
intend to capture and convert us? Is it by
what they show and say or is there a more
subversive and dastardly agenda in what they
prepensely leave out?
Next: God is
omnipresent, so why is He so difficult to
find in the movies?
To be continued…