“Monster a Go-Go” director Bill Rebane interviewed Tuesday, October 12, 2010, while at home in Wisconsin.

Hello.

Yes, Patrick.

Yes.

Yes, Patrick Douglas. Bill Rebane here.

How’s it going Bill?

Hanging in there.

Where are you today?

I am in beautiful northern Wisconsin.

Nice. I’m in beautiful, central Montana.

That sounds cool. I’d love to be in Montana right now.

It’s been very warm here.

Well, how can we put the Great Falls Tribune on fire today?

Congratulations on the re-release of ‘Monster A Go Go.’ It’s been 45 years since it first came out …

You think that’s deserving of congratulations?

(laughs). Sure, re-release, c’mon now. Why the re-release right now, what’s the occasion.

That’s a good question. I can’t figure why anybody wants to see the picture. After the first time I saw it after three years of not having anything to do with it, I was reminded there was a title called ‘Monster A Go Go’ and it turned out to be ‘Terror at Half Day,’ and I said ‘God, this is the worst picture I’ve ever seen.’ It’s a good thing that Ronnie Reagan wasn’t in it.

Was there a reason why it was re-released?

I guess there are enough cult fans out there that the distributor felt that this was the thing to do, much to my dismay. After the article, the spread, in Scary Monster Magazine, it started taking off again. You familiar with that?

I know the magazine, but I wasn’t aware of the article.

It was a 24-page spread about ‘Monster A Go Go.’ I can only assume that was the impetus of the distributor’s gusto to get it back out there again.

You said much to your dismay. Is this something that doesn’t sit too well with you having it all brought up again or are you taking it in stride and having a good laugh out of it?

I’m taking it in stride and I can’t figure out why anybody would wanna watch it because that’s not what we intended to do to start with. There seems to be enough interest in it to make it work. I hope people can use it. The story is more interesting than the picture itself because it was the first full feature film made in Chicago after about 30 years of dormancy after Charlie Chaplin studios closed in ’62, there was no feature film activity in Chicago. Being the first to do something in that order, that was a challenge. Then with the potential of Ronald Reagan to star in it was another challenge. Unfortunately, when I took the proposition back to my investors, they said ‘You gotta be kidding me. He’s a has-been. He’ll never make a dime at the box office for us.’ Since then, I’ve many times said that this is the picture that made Ronald Reagan President because he wasn’t in it. On top of it, it became a union picture because in Chicago you could do nothing without the participation of the union at that time. They basically took the money that we raised, put it in escrow and spent it as they pleased. By the time we got through, in those days, it was heavy equipment to make a picture. 300-pound camera. 3,000 dolley, transporting that into location, that took six, seven hours a day. That left a couple of hours left for shooting. That’s something interesting for filmmakers today.

Yeah, now they just have a tiny little HD camera they can use.

Exactly, everybody’s got a video camera as a producer and has a feature film. We did a lot and, I haven’t seen it too often, but when I’m forced to look at it, there’s all kinds of footage missing from every shot that could’ve added to the production values. I have no idea what happened to it or why it wasn’t used. I probably would’ve put it on the shelves myself. I would’ve continued working on it and editing it.

As it was shut down for a few years, how much of the final product was footage you shot before it was taken down?

We shot about half of it. There was only an interval of a few months, not years. I picked up after the union took all the money, we raised a few more bucks and I hired Herschell, Herschell Lewis, my cameraman and production manager, to finish it. I had good relations with the mayor of Chicago at the time. I was able to get all of Chicago’s cooperation. We had the fire department, police department, army, civil defense, everything racing up Michigan Avenue during rush hour, by the way, and we had some great footage. All action stuff and commotion stuff that would’ve added considerably to the production value of the film. What happened to that? I don’t know. Mr. Lewis made it a second feature for one of his releases. I turned over all my footage to him and made a distribution deal with him and he finished everything and post production editing and about three years later I saw it and that’s when I said ‘God, this has got to be the worst picture ever made.’

Was it something where he didn’t follow your vision?

The disruptions were the cause, lack of money and not being involved in anything past the shooting. Any filmmaker that gets a bunch of footage, he has his own vision of things and Herschell had, I’m sure, a vision for it at that time and did what he wanted to do. It served its purpose and I must give him credit. The title is really innovative and made it what it is today. ‘Monster A Go Go.’

When you saw the final product and you thought it was horrible, what did you think knowing your name was tied to it?

I was a little beyond that then. I was already successful in my industrial and commercial film production ventures and building a studio so I frankly didn’t give a darn about it. It’s done. You can’t go back in the past and I think all filmmakers look at that stuff and say ‘Oh my gosh, how did I do this, or how did I do that?’ I look at many of my pictures today and go ‘Oh shit,’ You get smart too old, as the old saying goes.

You talk about all the different obstacles with money being spent and union problems. What would you say was the biggest challenge for you in creating this film?

The biggest challenge was the union and raising money. It was like pulling teeth. As a first time filmmaker I had two short subjects under my belt, which were very successful, probably more successful than ‘Monster A Go Go.’ I originally delivered a good script, a good story. When things fell apart, you get very frustrated and in those days once your name got out there as in production, you were expected to do something and finish it. Otherwise you were a total failure. I thought the best thing I could’ve done was take the footage and let Herschell do something with it and wash my hands of it and that’s pretty much what happened. I went on to better things and I was blessed, I guess, that all the pictures we did after that had good international distribution and most of them were theatrical pictures and very successful. I really can’t complain. What was, was.

Nowadays when a film comes out you get tons of coverage with the Internet and press. What was it like when this came out originally as far as the reaction of audiences and critics? Take me back to that time period.

I’d be happy to. After finishing about two-thirds of the picture, I showed it to the Allied Theater Owners Association of Illinois, which were all professional theater people and distributors. We showed the raw footage and I still have the letter somewhere. They said ‘You have a very viable, good mounted picture for the horror market and we would be very interested in distributing it nationwide.’ That was all very good and encouraging. That’s what prompted me to go on and raise additional funds and then continue with a non-union crew. The union just killed us. They just took the money, put it in escrow and spent it for us. By the time we set up heavy equipment we had maybe two or three, maybe at best two hours to do serious filming. I always call it the picture that the union killed. Picking up after that was the biggest challenge was losing Peter Thompson as a star. Then rewriting the whole thing. By the time Herschell got it, it was somewhat disconfigurated. That was the biggest challenge. How do you save this thing after the stars left? June Travis hung in there because she was a very devoted actress and good friend of mine and her husband Fred Friedlob. She was a super professional and she would never abandoned anything unless she couldn’t help it. We just continued and we had a lot of production valued footage that today I don’t see in the picture.

Obviously you’re okay with it coming up as one of the worst movies of all time or people saying that it’s so bad it’s good (as billed on the press release). How do you get to a point where you’re okay with that kind of criticism with a film that has your name on it?

(laughs) You can take it two ways. In one way, I’m certainly not elated about it, happy about it, on the other hand, you can’t change what was. I’m the one who gave it that title basically. I’m the one who called it that. I’m going ‘God, this is the worst picture I’ve ever seen,’ after I shot it. Having done that myself and used that phrase myself, I can’t very well blame anyone else for giving it that title. You have to live with it. The old story in the business is ‘No publicity is bad publicity.’ That’s the way the old timers think about it. Today, I’m not so sure about it.

Today, publicity can go crazy like a wildfire. That’s sometimes good.

In the case of ‘Blair Witch,’ that was all hype and then nothing behind it. That’s the other side of the spectrum. You can hype something so much and then it turns out to be a total dud.

There are things in it that I enjoyed. It does get a little scary whenever the monster shows up. Talk about working with Henry Hite ‘cause he is a pretty scary guy in this movie.

He is a dream. The guy was just a wonderful guy. He was the tallest man in the world at the time. Meeting him is when I got the idea of building a story around him and building a monster story around him. The space capsule was a big thing in those days in the ‘60s, the first space probes. It all fit together. It was a timely science fiction mystery. It started out with a good script but those things can be destroyed when you have the union pressures and the unknowns that hit you as a young filmmaker and some things that you don’t think about. All those wonderful ideas and dreams can go right to hell but Henry couldn’t walk well because he had problems with his legs. We designed scenes where he didn’t have to do too much. Just stomp around. In retrospect, you look back, and every filmmaker looks back on pictures and says ‘Oh my God, how the heck did I do that?’ I do that with all my films. I see terrible deficiencies in my pictures. Budget has a lot to do with that, the cast has a lot to do with it, your own ideas when your young and you wanna make a name for yourself, you don’t think about the most important things that you should be watching. You get wise too old is basically the problem. I have regrets in retrospect, sure. Does it sound good being the worst picture ever made? No, it doesn’t sound good.

Talk about the cult following that it’s had all these years.

Here’s what I think might be good about it. If young filmmakers today and the film students that are making these low budget, 5,000 dollar, 10,000 dollar pictures, could learn from the story around ‘Monster A Go Go,’ then that would be worth everything. Then they could call it whatever they want. At least somebody has a benefit from it. I love talking to young filmmakers and people that come to the festivals and have all kinds of ambitions. I love talking to them about films. I love talking to students. If they learn something from this experience then maybe it’s a good thing. Forget the bad title or the worst movie ever made stuff but if they can get something from it, maybe this thing does have a purpose. In that concept, I’m always happy to talk to anyone about it. We had pretty much all of downtown Chicago tied up during rush hour. Are you familiar with Chicago?

I’ve never been there.

Michigan at Oak Street is the main thoroughfare and at 5 p.m. any given time of the year, that is the most congested area in the country and we had Michigan and Oak Street blocked off during rush hour. Squad cars, fire engines, civil defense units going up and down these thoroughfares. That’s an effort that nobody could get accomplished today. Even a major Hollywood production couldn’t get that kind of cooperation. That was a challenge to get that done, but we did it. It says something for Chicago film history. I don’t know if video makers today would think about staging something like that or having the guts to go out there and do it.

Are you full retired or do you plan on doing any upcoming projects?

My book ‘From Roswell With Love’ is starting to pick up. I plan on making that into a film early spring or late winter. It’s gotten very good reviews, it’s getting into the hands of a few production companies. I would prefer to make it as an independent feature. I just sold a screenplay, a love story to a California producer that Shirley McLain was supposed to star in. I’m still very much involved in the industry and do a lot of writing and rereleasing some of the old titles. I’ve been devoting most of my time to writing screenplays. Some of the projects we have on the table now I’m hoping to make in the next six months to a year. It keeps me busy. Teaching, consulting, takes up most of my time at the moment.

Bill, I appreciate you visiting with me.

Thank you. I really appreciate this, Patrick. I hope your readers have a good time in Great Falls. I’d love to be there. I love that country.

This has probably been the longest fall I can remember.

Enjoy it before the white stuff comes.

Take care, Bill.

Take care, I’ll talk to you later.

Bye.