As the weather turned cold, and fears of the end of the Millennium increased exponentially (at least in the media), I moved production indoors to shoot some important pre-mission scenes. I knew that the most crucial part to making this film successful was not the slapstick comedy, but making the characters believable, interesting and real to the audience. The one aspect to the story idea that made me interested in making this film was David, Gary and Sharon’s friendship. In the beginning David is kidnapped, and is forced to participate in their scheme. Gary and Sharon seem to be constantly arguing with each other. So I wanted the training sequence to show that through their mutual misery of experiencing Kramen’s ridiculous training, they were actually forming a bond with each other that leads to a sense of comradeship. The scene before the training begins, where Kramen sits down and explains the mission for the first time, sets the tone of their relationship. David, Gary and Sharon spend the entire scene trying not to laugh out loud at Kramen’s absurd name for the mission, and immediately form their common identity in their task ahead of them. Kramen has called the mission OPERATION: BUTT PLUG. As he tries to explain the details of the mission (which are scribbled down on the back of an envelope) the others continually poke fun at Kramen and his choice of names for the mission. David even comes up with their code names to be used over the radio: David, Gary and Sharon would be a team called Team Alpha, and Kramen would be called Brown Plunger of OPERATION: BUTT PLUG. Of course, Kramen doesn’t find this amusing.

“The only thing that you can do to prepare for a role where (your character who has amnesia) doesn’t know anything is NOTHING. You don’t prepare for it. (Laughs) You just show up. And most of the time the script changed so much that I hadn’t seen the script for each scene until I got there. And sometimes I didn’t even see the (script), sometimes you just told me what to say and I said it. (Chuckles) That actually helped a lot, not knowing just what was going on. As an actor, it helps to act like not having a freakin’ clue what’s going on as a character. (Laughs harder)” –Chris Aytes

 Early on in the script writing, I wanted to establish a possible romantic relationship between David and Sharon, and then show that Gary is the one in love with her. But after my wife read this she commented that I’ve done this sort of “I’ve got a crush on you” approach before, and I should make Gary and Sharon divorced to add a new dynamic to their relationship. I liked that idea, only changing it from ‘divorced’ to ‘married-but-separated’. In another important scene to establish their characters, after the training sequence and the night before the mission begins, Gary continues to think of what David is looking for (which he does from the beginning). When Sharon suggests love, she and Gary have a discussion about the touchy subject, which leads to Sharon describing her thoughts on love; “It’s as complicated as the universe, and as simple as a kiss.” Then she kisses David, much to Gary’s disapproval, only to have David respond, “No, that’s not it.” Only at the end of the scene (and after Kramen describes his one and only love, a non-existent Princess from an incredibly real, detailed and bizarre daydream) does Gary reveal to David, and to the audience, that he’s married to Sharon. It also shows that Gary still loves Sharon, and he’s involved in this illegal endeavor only to help her because she’s being blackmailed by Kramen into helping with this mission.

Sam recalled his thoughts about his character, “Gary is kind of a quiet, straight man, who’s thrust into this thoroughly insane situation. (Laughs) He’s just trying to do the best he can to get his way through it. (To prepare for the role,) I got used to wearing my glasses. I have glasses; I just don’t wear them. As I read through the script for the first time, Gary’s character kind of came out to me. (Originally, Sam was to play David. But Sam wanted to play Gary instead) We knew we wanted Gary and Sharon to be a couple, and as adult-looking a couple as possible. And I thought, maybe, one – I could do a better couple with Kristy, sorry Chris! (Laughs) (Sam was dating Kristy at the time.) But also, with my glasses and stuff, I could look a little older. And I had already done the ‘stupid-guy-who-gets-cajoled-into-an-adventure’ part in SIDETRACKED, (Laughs) and I was ready to try something else.”

 Kristy explained her thoughts about her character, Sharon, “She’s not very nice to her husband, Gary. She’s very overbearing and controlling. She ‘wears-the-pants’ in their relationship, and just kind of beats him up a lot. She does whatever she wants to. I hope people don’t think I’m like that! (Laughs) Yeah, I don’t go around stomping on people’s feet or hold guns to people. The ‘dirty look’ thing, the look I always gave Gary whenever he’d say some sarcastic thing to me, I kind of worked on that a little bit. (Sam and I) sat down and we talked about our characters before, and discussed what we’d been through. So it was pretty easy to pull some emotions out from that.” 

The first scene shot involving the mission itself was Gary hacking into a computer in an office at Fort Walker. (Fort Walker is a fictional military base, the exterior shooting location took place at the two B-29 hangers at the Great Bend Municipal Airport. The interiors were shot on the college campus, including the Nursing Program offices for the computer hacking scene.) Kramen explains that the US military has their own ‘Internet’, called ZEUS Data Network, and he wants to steal some secrets about captured UFOs at Area 51. Because Area 51, or Groom Lake, has become so famous, the military is moving its operation to several other bases. Kramen wants to know which ones - to inform the public, and make a lot of money off the book and film rights. For him it’s easier to sneak onto a small military base in the middle of Kansas than to break into the Pentagon, in order to gain access to their own Internet system.

Brock Allen Roesch seemed to enjoy the shoot at the airport involving a stand-off with an approaching car, “I liked the car chase sequence. I didn’t get to do a whole lot in the tunnels, she pretty much had her gun on me the whole time. The car chase scene – I was pretty much the only one out that day for that. I thought it was just kind of fun playing ‘chicken’ with a car, and add my own ad-libs whenever I could. It was extremely cold that day. Between takes, I was running over to get the jacket. The wind chill was just terrible. I did not expect (the time it took to shoot) at all. I expected like maybe an hour, and it ended up taking like maybe 3 or 3 1/2 hours. But it was extremely cold that day, and I was hoping we could get out of there as soon as possible. But I was having fun at the same time, so it was fun, actually, doing the movie, doing that scene. And I wanted to leave, but I didn’t (want to leave). So it was one of those things.”

My father, Don Adams, recalled shooting at the airport, “Cold as sin out there (filming the car chase scene). (Brock Allen Roesch) was about to freeze. And I remember giving him my jacket, and you had given me yours…thank God, because it was cold. I would hold the coat of the guy dressed like a solider, and as soon as the scene was done he would run and jump in the coat again! (Laughs) (A few weeks later) we ended up back in the underground segment (of campus), it was a familiar area; I had seen it several times now. But a great place to shoot. I don’t know which (scene) I enjoyed shooting the most. I mean it was all fun. I enjoy working with the making of the film. I wish, in a sense, that I was closer to you to help you any time you made a film. I’d like to be the ‘grunt’ person because I think there just a certain excitement about the whole process of filmmaking. And I don’t feel responsible. I think that’s where the hard part would be, when you’d have to feel responsible for the shot having been done properly and getting everybody lined up. Scheduling people to do something is difficult enough, and then do it on a cold day and have them running around on an airport tarmac is not exactly an easy thing. (Chuckles) Particularly for what you’re paying them! Considering that this is all free anyway. The people doing it must love to do it, too. Otherwise they wouldn’t show up for that kind of thing, you know.”

When I told Sam, Nate and Tom that I wanted a fight scene involving Gary and Thing One and Thing Two, they wanted the biggest, best fight scene they could possibly create. Taking place after Gary’s fight with Lin Fat (which was an inside joke referring to the fight scene between Sam and Quy in SIDETRACKED), Thing One and Thing Two end up kidnapping and interrogating David. Preparing to use the CTE 1000 on David (the Cerebral Thought Eraser that was basically the device in the earlier H.I.A.T.U.S. Project story line I was originally planning to use in SOMETHING, where it was used to input information from a computer directly into a person’s brain but it erases the person’s memory instead), Gary interrupts and the fight breaks out into a large boiler room. Sam, Nate and Tom choreographed the entire fight themselves, finding objects to use as weapons and using the layout of the room for unique stunts. 

The most dangerous moment involved a stunt Nate and Sam wanted to do, where Thing One tackles Gary on top of a high ledge, and they start to fall off. Gary grabs a nearby railing and swings out of the way, but Thing One falls all the way down onto the concrete floor. There was only problem with the stunt; there was really nothing but the concrete floor below them. Nate felt he could jump down and roll safely from that height, and Sam was always willing to put himself at risk in the name of art (or at least entertainment). If Nate landed incorrectly, or Sam wasn’t able to grab or hang on to the railing, someone would have gotten seriously hurt. We shot the stunt with three cameras, and everything went exactly as planned. No one was hurt (although Sam looked like he hit his chin on the railing), and the shots looked great. By the end of the 5-hour shoot, the actors were exhausted and drenched in sweat. But they were excited about what they did, and had a lot of fun running around like kids in a candy store creating their ultimate fight scene. It was a long and tiring day, but it was a good day. It was one of those days that make it worthwhile, where everyone was working together to make the best film possible, and having fun at the same time.

Sam recalled, “I really liked filming the fight scene with Nate and Tom, because we just did a bunch of cool stuff there. We just started the (filming of the fight scene), ‘OK, we’re going to go over here’, and then we filmed it. And then, ‘now we’re going to go over here’, and we then filmed it. ‘We’re going to do this’, and we filmed it. And then we had that accident with the broom head coming off, and that brought on the whole ‘fight-with-the-sticks’ thing. We wanted to use the stairs (on wheels), didn’t know how, so that came up as we went. (It was used to end the ‘fight-with-the-sticks’) But the one trick I really wanted to do was the ‘jumping-up-the-wall-to-grab-the-gate-thing-and-swing-out’ (to kick Thing One). (The stunt where Sam and Nate fall off the ledge was the most dangerous done in the film.) Yeah, that was a bit dangerous, because we had two people in the stunt instead of just one. I’m always cautious, but I never really worry about pain. (Laughs)”

Chris Aytes spent most of the time shooting the fight scene chained to a chair, “I was seriously chained up. For the longest time I was back in the back room (while) they were filming this whole fight scene (out in the boiler room). I just hung out in the back room (still chained to the chair), and the lights were on a motion sensor. And I discovered that if I sat still long enough, the lights went out. The first three times it freaked me out every time – I’d have no idea what was going on – so I’d move up and the light would come back on. I think I fell asleep a couple of times (while still chained to the chair). I took a couple of half-hour naps during that shoot. (Laughs) I was chained up for a long time!”

For Nate Miller, the fight scene was a very different experience compared to the live plays he had done, “I remember I had a lot of fun doing the fight scene. A lot of fun. I think I kinda got bit by that – I want to do action like all the time now. (I had only done plays before this), so it was a lot different than what I thought it would be. Even one scene you would cut that down into certain different camera angles, and have us do a couple just of lines and then do a couple of lines from a different area. It’s a little bit harder to stay in character, I think, because you’re jumping back and forth. You’re not in character the entire time. I like it. It took us five hours (to shoot the fight scene) that day, and we have six minutes of footage. (Chuckles) Yeah, it took a lot of time. Got dirty, but it was fun. I liked (the fight scene edited together). I liked it a lot. It was better than what I thought (it would be). I didn’t know what the camera angles would be (when we shot it), but I was really pleased with them. And the sound effects - when I was watching it with Tom (Birdero), we said the sound effects (for the fight scene) were really good. Tom’s part really added a lot to it. The whole film overall was really good. I think it’s like your best one. And I’m not just saying that because I was in it. I had a lot of fun and look forward to being able to do it again.”

Once again my four-year old daughter, Morgan, made a cameo appearance in the film. She and her friend, Jenna Williams, were two young girls in the tour group, along with my wife, Tracy, as their mother, and Ed and his two henchmen. Originally the scene was intended to be outside in front of one of the B-29 hangers. But bad weather forced the shoot indoors, into a short hallway. This actually worked out better, because part of the joke of the scene consisted of the tour guide informing everyone that, “Because this is an active military base, there are some areas that are considered off-limits to the public. In fact, this is the only building you can visit. But we do have a nice gift shop behind you.” And thus, the only part of the base, besides the gift shop, that they could see was that small hallway. But during the short explanation of the history of the base (including, “Fort Walker is most famous for being the training site of the ill-fated Peppard mission, where a B-29 crew was lost in World War II during a bombing run in the Bermuda Triangle. Although technically they are still considered missing, and not dead!”), Ed, Thing One and Thing Two turn and stare intently at Kramen, who spends the rest of the scene fidgeting from their strange behavior. At the end of the scene Julie Ann Willis and I improvised a final shot where the tour guide approaches the group and says, “That’s the end of the tour. Now if you will follow me I’ll show you the gift shop and the Nuclear Holocaust Fallout Shelter. Won’t the kids love it?”

Chris Aytes, Kristy Koelsch and Sam Wright on location at the B-29 hanger at the Great Bend Municipal Airport

Mark Adams films Sam Wright descending the ladder to the tunnels

For Sam Wright, this film was a different experience, “In SIDETRACKED I had little to no idea what was going on, but by this one I was like, ‘oh, you know that shot would look good. We could do it from this angle, and that’s how we’ll edit this out!’ (Laughs) I understood how it was all going to work, so I think that helped me do better with it.”

Kristy remembered her first film experience, “It was a great experience (to make SOMETHING). It was interesting and exciting. I know there were long breaks in between our shooting sessions, but it was exciting. A good experience, and I hope to do more.”

 Since this was Chris Aytes’ first film as well, he began to realize what it took to make a film, “I didn’t know much about the actual camera work, and I know different directors have different ways of doing it. But just how much we break down each scene, and we shoot this from this angle and shoot that from that angle. And then it all meshes together to make a smooth scene. I never pictured it that way, because when you’re watching a movie you don’t see it like breaking down. You think, ‘oh, they’re just acting out this whole scene (in one take)’. Most of the time they’re not, sometimes they are but that takes multiple cameramen and cameras, and strategic places to place the cameras. I learned a lot about the actual camera work of making movies.”

“If you have the opportunity, try it. It’s a learning experience.” – Brock Allen Roesch

“I learned a lot, but I don’t know what I learned. (Laughs) I learned something, but I can’t tell you what it is.” – Kristy Koesch

The World Premiere Presentation of SOMETHING, on July 22, 2000, started with a surprise of how many people actually attended the screening. Normally one of my premieres occur in April or May, during the spring semester allowing for students living on campus to easily come and see the movie. Because of the longer production schedule, the premiere wasn’t until the middle of summer when a lot fewer faculty and students were on campus. I expected a low turn out, mainly consisting of the actors and a few of their family and friends, but there were actually as many people in the audience as in previous years. And they seemed to enjoy the film, laughing at the right moments and giving a big round of applause at the end. The evening eased any fears I had about the film’s length or story, and my usual opening night jitters. I received comments like “Good Job!”, “Way to go!”, “That WAS good! I think you guys had TOO MUCH FUN!”, and “I have to tell you I loved it! It was absolutely hilarious! It was amazing!” from members of the audience. Gina Munz commented, “Mr. Adams, it was ABSORBING! Your film was fabulous!” David Baldwin came up and told me, “That was too good! That was a lot funnier that the last one (SIDETRACKED). I thought the fight scenes turned out really good. REALLY good!” Sam Wright commented, “It was awesome! Much better than SIDETRACKED.”

Randy Allen remembered, “I enjoyed it. It was a good turn out (at the premiere). I liked it. I thought it was funny. I liked the humor bits to it. I agree (that it was a better looking film than SIDETRACKED). The camera cuts seemed quicker. There was more action - there was more movement. Some of the stunts Quy and Sam did on (the B-29 hanger roof) - I’m very impressed by what they did up there. (SOMETHING) was really nice. I enjoyed this one more than SIDETRACKED, which is odd because I really thought I would like SIDETRACKED more than this one. Maybe it was because of Sam’s relationship to (Kristy), but the chemistry of the relationship seemed more at ease compared to say Julie Ann (Willis and Tysen Johnson) in TIMELINE. Overall I thought it was really good. I think the audience liked it.”

My wife Tracy seemed to like the film as well, “It was an enjoyable film. I think out of the things you’ve produced so far while we’ve been in Great Bend, the last two (SIDETRACKED and SOMETHING) I have liked the most. But I think that they’re more complicated in character development, and script writing is more involved. You haven’t had any problems with the technical production of shooting on video, and lighting and editing and those sort of things. You’ve got that figured out. But how to take a group of amateur actors and put together something that’s shot over a course of months on weekends? And put it together and have it all sort of ‘gel’ at the end to something with the characters - and still have some depth and some humor and some seriousness? I think that’s been more perfected in the last two films than maybe in some of the others.”

I entered SOMETHING into the 2001 KAN Film Festival, braced for whatever response it may bring forth from the judges. Since I felt SOMETHING was a much better film than SIDETRACKED, I hoped that someone would at least not give it any negative scores this time. I had, in fact, entered five entries into the film festival, and received two notifications that I was a finalist. Now, this is where things get a little strange. The KAN Film Festival officially announced the finalists in the student divisions, and said they would soon release the official finalists for the open division – which I had entered all five videos. They never did release that list of open division finalists, instead they sent out the list of when all finalists, Student and Open Divisions, were scheduled to be shown the day of the festival. My Original Category entry called A BRIEF ENCOUNTER WITH A MADMAN was listed, and I assumed that SOMETHING was the other finalist. Now remember, they select five finalists in each category. For the category that SOMETHING was entered into there was only four finalists listed. All were longer films, and to show them took up the entire day. Again this was not the official announcement of Open Division finalists, and I was notified in the mail that I had two films as finalists, therefore I assumed there was either an error when they published the schedule or they just decided not to show my film the day of the festival because it sucked and didn’t have a chance to win anything. Therefore I listed SOMETHING as a finalist at the 2001 KAN Film Festival. I had paid for the judges comments for all five entries, but received only four sets. Somehow they had lost the judges critiques for my film SOMETHING. I began to feel like a love/hate relationship had formed between myself and the KAN Film Festival – they love to hate me.

Another odd occurrence connected to the 2001 KAN Film Festival happened when a newspaper artlicle was published about the festival with an unusual quote. In the May 31, 2001 Lawrence Journal-World article ‘KAN Do Attitude’ by Dan Lybarger, at the end of the article appeared the following quote by Nick Reimond, Free State High School Senior and Co-Director of THE BELLMAN, a finalist in the 2001 KAN Film Festival, “If you want to do filmmaking as a career, you have to be in New York or L.A. Still, Lawrence is a good place to do creative things in general because it’s a college town and it’s more liberal and conductive to the creative process in general. We have it better here than someone in say, Great Bend.”

I thought, ‘Wow, what an arrogant thing to say!’ I’m sure Nick Reimond just picked out a name of another town in Kansas at random – it could have easily been Garden City, Liberal or Colby. But he obviously didn’t know about me (there was no reason he should have known about me) and assumed that no one in such a place as Great Bend could possibly make a film, or if they do they obviously can’t do as good of a job as Nick Reimond in Lawrence.

I sent the following reply to the writer of the article, Dan Lybarger, at the Lawrence Journal-World, “I just read your article ‘KAN do attitude’ on the Lawrence Journal World web site and enjoyed it very much. One thing struck me in a strange way. You used a quote by Nick Reimond; ‘Lawrence is a good place to do creative things in general because it’s a college town and it’s more liberal and conductive to the creative process in general. We have it better here than someone in say, Great Bend.’ My name is Mark Adams and I am an independent filmmaker in Great Bend. I am from K.C. originally, and went to college at KU, but I must say that Nick Reimond’s comment is rather strange in the idea that it’s not the location that’s important, as much as it is the person with the vision and the ambition to make a film. Granted, you do have more access to equipment and people in Lawrence than in Great Bend, but I have been making independent narrative productions and entering them into the KAN film festival every year since 1993, and have won several awards there and at other festivals. There are a lot of talented people in Kansas who make films, and I hope that such events as the KAN film festival work to encourage anyone – student, amateur or professional – to pursue their dreams and make the film or video they want to create. Lawrence is certainly a wonderful place to make a film, in an environment that supports and encourages filmmakers. But I think that even in Great Bend there are people who can succeed in making their dreams come true. You might be surprised by how many people there are in the state of Kansas that are talented filmmakers. I just thought I would send this FYI – Sometimes someone in Great Bend may have it better than someone in Lawrence!”

Brian Powell told me a short time later that he saw my letter to the editor in the Lawrence Newspaper, and I was surprised to hear I had even sent them one. I discovered that Dan Lybarger is a free-lance writer and lives in Kansas City, so he never received my reply. Instead the Lawrence Journal-World published my message, sent via email, as a letter to the editor. Marty Keenan, Co-Chair of The Micheaux Independent Film Festival, read the article as well, and told me, “I appreciate you letter in the JW.  It would feel a little creepy to have someone publish something that you didn’t expect to be published, but it was a good letter and was from the heart.” I was surprised that Dr. Chuck Berg, Professor of Film at the University of Kansas in Lawrence also liked my letter, “Thanks for copying me on your ‘letter to the editor’, which I found thoughtful and judicious and to the point. Of course, I agree with you 100%. That kind of geographic snobbery always needs to be challenged. And that’s precisely what you did. Good for you!”

To read a review of SOMETHING at the b-independent.com web site click here

http://www.b-independent.com/reviews/something.htm

To read a review of SOMETHING by Joe Bob Briggs click here:

http://www.joebobbriggs.com/drivein/2002/something.html

I had the unique opportunity of having b-independent.com review SOMETHING, as well as the renowned Drive-In Movie Critic of Grapevine, Texas. My first introduction to Joe Bob Briggs was when he hosted TNT’s MONSTERVISION. But Mr. Briggs (or can I call you Joe Bob?…and yes, I know that’s not your real name…) was not as impressed with my film, although his review was entertaining to read. (You can read the reviews by visiting the web site addresses listed above.) I wasn’t surprised with the mixed reviews – the positive one at b-independent.com and the sort-of-positive one by Joe Bob Briggs. One thing I’ve learned is that I can’t please everyone so I no longer try. What struck me with Mr. Briggs review was how much he seemed bother by the acting in my film. For one thing, professional actors are not as plentiful in Central Kansas as they are in major cities or where Joe Bob lives. Secondly, it should be pointed out that a ‘professional actor’ may not necessarily be a ‘good actor’ (as I saw first hand on the two low-budget films in L.A. in 1989). In his long career Joe Bob Briggs must have seen so many bad films with terrible acting – and I mean absolutely horrible, wretched acting. Is the acting in SOMETHING really THAT bad? Compared with those other horrible films (not to mention any names…like HOBGOBLINS), I would hope our film was better than watching ‘the staff of Dairy Queen put on an Off-Off-Off-Off-Off Broadway production’. 

I discovered he had watched and reviewed the Michael Paul Girard film OVER SEXED RUGSUCKERS FROM MARS, the movie shot on Super 8 film by the director of the second film I worked on back in 1989 in Los Angeles. Michael used his girlfriend and other friends as actors in this bizarre film about horny aliens possessing a vacuum cleaner. Joe Bob Briggs gave OVER SEXED RUGSUCKERS FROM MARS three stars. I guess SOMETHING wasn’t his kind of film. But it was still exciting, yet surreal, that a movie critic as famous as Joe Bob Briggs watched and reviewed one of my films. He did say I was a good filmmaker. (I wanted to send that quote to the judge of the KAN Film Festival who gave SIDETRACKED a ‘negative five’ score.) He didn’t really talk about what he did like, but if the acting was the only problem I’ll assume he enjoyed the rest of the film on some level. (I’m not sure if I would have described SOMETHING as a ‘POLICE ACADEMY for geeks’. The approach to the comedy in both films was completely different.) I did enjoy his line, “The finest movie ever made with equipment borrowed from Barton County Community College.” Even though it was essentially a ridicule of the film, it was also very true.

I sent an email to Joe Bob Briggs thanking him for watching and reviewing my film and explained how and why SOMETHING was made. A few months later I was surprised to receive a reply from him, “Dear Mark, Well, I could tell you didn’t have any money, and I’m always in awe of anyone who actually gets an entire movie made by himself. I hope you realize that I didn’t think the actual script or camerawork was bad at all.  I just thought you could have gone down to the drama department and found some trained actors and then really had something to be proud of. I’d love to see your next movie…Later gator, Joe Bob”

For more information on Joe Bob Briggs click here to visit his web site at http://www.joebobbriggs.com/  

Mark Adams: Truly Independent Filmmaking