Exclusive Interview with WE ARE STILL HERE’s Ted Geoghegan [Part I]

We Are Still Here kicks off its theatrical and VOD release on June 5th and regular Daily Dead readers know that I really loved this movie when I caught it at the Stanley Film Festival last month. The directorial debut of Ted Geoghegan could have easily been a straight homage to 70s Euro Horror, but ends up being much more complex and mature thanks to a number of great performances and a rich backstory.

I recently caught up with Ted Geoghegan to discuss all things We Are Still Here. For the first part of the interview, we stay out of spoiler territory, talking about how he got this project off the ground, finding the right cast, and his horror influences:

Thanks for taking the time to chat about We Are Still Here. Can you tell our readers how this idea first came about and what it took to get this project off the ground?

Ted Geoghegan: The idea actually came to me about three years ago from a filmmaker who I was friends with that  happened to be a huge Fulci fan as well. We bounced around ideas back and forth a little while, trying to come up with something that we thought was fun and ultimately came up with the very loose concept for We Are Still Here, and I wrote the script just based on that.

After the script was done, I had just fallen in love with it so much, that I asked him if he wouldn't mind if I shopped it around as potentially something for my first film. He was totally keen on it, and kind of let me roll with it, and brought it to Travis Hughes and he brought it to Dark Sky, and we had a movie going.

That's really cool. Can you talk more about your influences? I know you said Fulci, which I  can definitely see, but what else did you grow up on? What's your sweet spot for horror?

Ted Geoghegan: You can't really see it in this movie, but I'm a huge slasher geek. Slashers are my one sloppy genre of horror that I unabashedly adore and not in an ironic or silly way. I grew up at the video store. I grew up in rural Montana, and I just kept going to the video store every single day and rented as many movies as I could possibly rent, and just kind of creating my own cinematic language for myself. During the 80s and early 90s, I just kind of fell in love with slasher films. I like how unabashed they were and how brash they were.

It was just thrilling and titillating and all the things that I wanted out of genre cinema. Over the years, as a screenwriter and as a producer, I've written and produced several slasher films that kind of recapture a bit of that silliness that I grew up loving. I kind of wanted to do a 180 for this. I think this movie will really surprise people who know me in how un-Ted it is in a lot of ways. I think it's substantially more mature than anything else I've ever written. I feel like it's a more appropriate ode to the films I grew up watching than something that doesn't take itself seriously.

Talking about this being a mature movie, did you know you always wanted to go with a more mature cast? Usually, so many horror movies these days target a younger demo with a younger cast. Did you get any push back on your casting choices or everyone was on board?

Ted Geoghegan: I think from a very early point the producers were all on board with a more mature cast, which helped me a lot because I didn't need see any other way of doing the film. It had to be a mature cast. I often reference Fulci and Lovecraft and things like that, but something that I feel doesn't get referenced enough are the mature haunted house movies of the 70s and 80s that are about adults making adult decisions in a very unreal environment, like The Changeling. You've got this movie where it's 62-year-old George C. Scott versus a ghost. It's played very straight. It's not played for laughs. I think there's a real charm about seeing such a seasoned actor playing such a world-weary character who's been confronted with something that's completely outside of what he thought reality was.

It makes it more believable with someone like Barbara Crampton or Larry Fessenden in these roles. Was Barbara the first person you cast?

Ted Geoghegan: Yeah, Barbara's a family friend. She's somebody that I've known for several years. I met her when I was doing PR for You're Next. We just completely hit it off and we became fast friends, and to this day I consider her a very close friend.

When the prospect of making this film came together, I hit her up right away, and I said, "I wrote a role for you. I'd really love it if you would consider playing it." She liked the fact that it was a very atypical character for her. It's a very sad, quiet role. It's not exploitative. In a lot of ways, it's very minimalist. I think she got really excited about doing something substantially different from what she was used to.

When financing came together, of course, no one would question working with Barbara Crampton, so the producers were immediately excited about having that happen. I'd also written the role of Jacob for Larry Fessenden, who's a buddy of mine. Again, I was very grateful that the producers went with that decision and let me have Larry because I really can't see anyone else in that role. I'd written it for him, and I just think he owns it through and through.

He also definitely helps with the comedy, which is interesting because, as serious as this movie is, there were a few really good laughs in there.

Ted Geoghegan: Oh yeah, for sure. While Jacob and May are never meant to be straight up funny, they're certainly there to add levity to the film. You've got these two very quirky strange people showing up into this very serious, quiet situation.

---------

Check back tomorrow for the second part of the interview, where we talk about We Are Still Here's backstory, ending, practical effects, and what's next for the writer / director. *Update: The second part of our interview is now available!