INT: Let’s continue talking about Clint Eastwood. So you did how many projects with Clint as First AD [First Assistant Director] and he as a Director?

TJ: As a First, it was a First [First Assistant Director], it was BRONCO BILLY and--BRONCO BILLY MCCOY [BRONCO BILLY] and ANY WHICH WAY YOU CAN. [INT: And do you recall any anecdotes? What technical stuff as opposed to just gossip, you know, set gossip? I mean I think it’s very interesting about how prepared he is, and the fact that he can shoot short days, and the fact that he does shoot very few takes, but are there any other technical things that you can recall working with Clint Eastwood?] No. It was always a very pleasurable experience. He always, it’s always a very relaxed set. He had a crew that he had kept with him; his prop master had been with him for years; his transpiration coordinator had been with him for years; a lot of his key crew, he used the same grip and gaffer and cameraman on several pictures. And it was a very relaxed set and it just liked to operate that way. It was a big happy family. They just went out and got it done and had fun with it. I think everybody was very supportive of everybody and it was just, just a wonderful experience. He also had a stock company of actors that he used to use, the same actors repeatedly in different roles. And it was kind of fun to see them come in and then, of course, the new people who came in were, were interesting to work with. But it was just a real pleasurable experience. I think his pictures were all well prepared and well scouted and then well executed. And I really think the preparation was, was the secret to it. [INT: Preparation is the key to the success.] Yes it is. Yes it is.

INT: What other Directors did you work with as a First [First Assistant Director]?

TJ: Oh gosh, I have to…[INT: Well, after you, I mean after you’ve worked with Spielberg [Steven Spielberg] and the Eastwood [Clint Eastwood], I mean?] Well, I did a fun picture in the Philippines with Peter Werner--one of his first pictures-- DON’T CRY, IT’S ONLY THUNDER. We shot in the Philippines. [INT: What’s that about?] It was a wonderful story about a medic who was, who had sort of--[INT: Vietnam?]--Viet--yeah, during Vietnam War, who was purloining supplies from the base to support an orphanage. And he actually found some orphans in a found little bombed out building and got them there, and then was bringing them supplies and food. And then he came across a nun with orphans and got them connected with it. And by the time he had finished his tour, he and a nurse had, had, were supporting, with the support of a couple other people from the base, were supporting this orphanage of 75 to 100 orphans with supplies from the base. [INT: A true story?] It’s a true story. [INT: Oh wow.] Yeah, yeah.

INT: What was it like being an AD [Assistant Director] in the Philippines?

TJ: It was wonderful. We took, basically, eight when we went--took a production designer, a set decorator, production designer, an Assistant Director, myself, a Director, one person on the production office and a costumer and the balance was local hire, Philippines. Excuse me, our DP [Director of Photography, Cinematographer] was, our DP, grip and gaffer were Australian--came from Australia. [INT: Did they have a film industry in the Philippines?] Oh absolutely, yeah. No, they had done Coppola’s [Francis Ford Coppola] masterpiece there. But there are a lot of experienced film crews there. One problem we had, the HMIs [Hydrargyrum medium-arc iodide] kept overheating, ‘cause it was just so hot and humid. We had amazing rain, amazing hot weather--[INT: But you got all the equipment, you got all the equipment out of the Philippines?] We brought the camera equipment from Hong Kong, and it came with camera assistants; they came with the gear and they were basically camera mechanics; they were terrific. Jim Glea--[James Glennon]--we took the operator as well, Jim Glennon, who just recently passed away; Jim Glennon was the operator on the picture. But it was a wonderful experience. The Filipinos crews were terrific. We had to--[INT: Was there anything special about it in terms of your prep, in terms of your dealing with a Filipino crew?] Well, the Filipino crew was very deferential and we used to--I was constantly getting people out of the hallway, ‘cause if the Director would want to stand and talk to an Actor or to the cameraman in the hallway, the crew would just kind of stand there deferentially and wait. And I’d say, “Would you take your conversation over here, please,” so the guys keep the passageway clear, so the people could work. And they were wonderful crews, very hard working; the crews were very large, because they didn’t have a lot of motorized people. They’d just hire four people to carry it, so they had a lot of bodies, and so the crews were fairly large. And they had separate catering. I used to always prefer to eat with the Filipino crew, ‘cause I liked the food better. But they had American catering and they had Filipino catering. [INT: You mean they brought a caterer from the United States?] No, no, no, It was a, they prepared, they prepared an American, a Filipino cuisine, and an American cuisine, meals, American style meals as opposed to Filipino meals.

INT: How did you select your Second, your Second AD [Second Assistant Director]?

TJ: The Second, I had a Filipino First [First Assistant Director] and then he had two Seconds that worked with him. [INT: So you were a First and you had a Filipino First?] Yes. [INT: And you had two Filipino Seconds. Right. And they were all, they were all bilingual and most of them--the set ran in English, but often time broke into Tagalog, which the Filipino ADs--[INT: How did you, how did you split your duties with the Filipino First?] He was kind of at my side, and would often times, like a key Second might be at your side, and so it kind of, it kind of functioned within the Seconds would work with me, perhaps the Second’s Seconds, but it worked fairly well. We had walkie-talkies out and communicated to ‘em. We were shooting in a refugee camp, a Vietnamese refugee camp and some of the older, older structures and it was a, it was a wonderful experience. A very tight knit group and the crew, we had a wonderful time. Another directing experience, I was, I had the privilege of being Marty Feldman’s Assistant Director on THE LAST REMAKE OF BEAU GESTE. And Bill Gilmore [William S. Gilmore], again, our Producer, at this time, was producing the picture, and I came on as an Assistant Director for, for Marty. And I remember when I was called down to meet him, I was, it was difficult; he’s such a comical looking man, with his--[INT: Bulging eyes.]--with his bulging eyes. I had to talk to his eyebrows to keep a straight face and I could not look him in the eye without, without breaking up--[INT: So basically--] so I learned to talk to his eyebrows. But it was interesting working with another Director who’s also--he’d written a brilliant screenplay. And it was kind of a first opportunity for him to direct, so that was an interesting process to go through with him.

INT: What was it like, well, let me ask you a question; two things. First of all, what is it like working with an Actor--you’ve done this at least twice in terms of Clint Eastwood and Marty Feldman--working with an Actor who’s also the Director; I mean, is there anything different that you do, are there any additional responsibilities that you take on?

TJ: Well, with Marty I think you’re looking, really--[INT: Well, that was another question in terms of--] trying to look with a Director’s eye at the picture. Now, with Marty, I felt I took on a bit more looking, watching with a Director’s eye. He had--Howard West was his Producer and was on the set all the time. And if there were issues or we felt we needed another take, if the cameraman wouldn’t come forth with it--Gerry Fisher was our cameraman--wouldn’t ask for another take, I would sometimes might indicate that we needed another one or perhaps I’d talk to Howard [Howard West] and Howard would talk to Marty about perhaps needing to get another take. But it was interesting. We had, you know, they were, they were at monitor, watching the monitor all the time. [INT: What about a First [First Assistant Director] working with a first time Director? Marty Feldman being the first time--] With Marty, I think in the preparation, I just kind of had to cover the steps and make sure that he was doing his, you know, his, did he have a shot list? We’d talk about the next day’s work and perhaps a little more thoroughly than you might with a seasoned Director, just going through the steps of what the next day’s work would be, and going through the each day’s work and talking about number of shots, and talking about requirements, ‘cause often times, Marty [Marty Feldman] wouldn’t know until he got there what he was going to do. And he’d get, if you tried to pin him down too much, he’d get a little, a little, a little flustered, ‘cause, I used to--it’s like working in comedy, you stay a little wider and light a little brighter to give the comic room to move and do what he wants to. So it was, it was interesting doing that…

INT: How have you seen, how have you seen the role of the First AD [First Assistant Director], I mean, you’ve really seen, between 1969 and today, you’ve seen a really changing industry and a changing role of the First AD. I’m gonna ask you this about the First AD, I’m gonna ask you this about the, the UPM [Unit Production Manager]. How would you characterize the changing role of the First AD over the years?

TJ: Well, what’s--I think its become a little more political, since the Director has the right to choose his First [First Assistant Director] now in feature films, not in television, but we’re speaking about feature films? I think the First AD networks a little differently amongst Directors, and works a little differently with his relationship with the Director than it is with the, with the studio. And it, it’s a fine line, ‘cause you’re always--a First [First Assistant Director] has an obligation, obviously, to the Director and obviously to the studio. He has, we said, fiscal responsibility, because the First is the Producers’ representative on the set, even though he’s the Director’s AD [Assistant Director]. So that loyalty, I think, is primary to the Director now with First ADs, where as it used to be to the Producer, which is subtle differences. I have always felt that a good AD [Assistant Director] should always push the Director a little bit or just make sure that the Director is aware of his time frame during the course of the day--[INT: But you’re protecting him also.] You’re protecting him. At the end of the day, if you can pick up an extra, you know, few minutes here or a few minutes there, it can be one or two setups at the end of the day, so you’re really, you’re really on his side. Some Directors encourage that and support that; others would prefer you not to do that. And you have to just pick you’re, you know, work in the style that your Director wants to work with.

INT: Have you seen a change between 1969 or 1972 with the role, the authority, the…

TJ: Well, I think, I think the First AD [First Assistant Director] sort of has the authority of the Director a little bit, in the way that he’s been picked by the Director. When the First says, “I need additional help here, I need additional Seconds [Second Assistant Directors]," or, "I need additional PAs [Production Assistants]," or, "I need this," or, "I need that,” the Unit Manager [Unit Production Manager], if he was not the Director’s pick, might be more inclined to say, “Do you really need this? No, you can’t have this, you can’t have that.” But since he’s the Director’s pick, I think oftentimes the First AD has a little more power, ‘cause he has the power of that Director’s preference of getting what he wants to run the set. Now, I--in the scope of things, it should all be the same. I mean the Producer should want what the Director’s asking for. But I think the Production Manager [Unit Production Manager] or the Producer can’t be quite as firm or can’t push the First as much as he perhaps could’ve before he was the Director’s choice.

INT: Did you notice, I mean, I’m reflecting back on my career, did you notice more of a collaboration, you know, in the ‘70s [1970s] and early ‘80s [1980s], collaboration between the First AD [First Assistant Director] and the UPM [Unit Production Manager]…

TJ: I think so. I think so. And I think what’s interesting--[INT: It was really a team. Now--] It was a team. And now the First is not, doesn’t feel, well, I can’t say what the First feels or what the First doesn’t feel. But it doesn’t appear that he’s as closely aligned to the production office as he once used to be. I always, as a Production Manager [Unit Production Manager], it’s interesting as you have questions and answers, you like to have access to the Director to ask your questions to get the information you want. Some Directors want that information coordinated through the First and you never know how the information is being presented to the Director and how, of course, and how it’s being presented back to you. And if the First is the sole person who’s communicating with the Director, he’s communicating in the matter that he presented the picture in the light that he wants to present it to the Director. And he has that ability to paint a dismal view of the production office if he so chooses, or he can be very supportive of the production office if he so chooses. And I think it varies from production to production and I think it varies from AD [Assistant Director] to AD. A lot of ADs are very supportive of the production office and the Producer and the department, and others are not and I think it depends sometimes. The AD’s job--excuse me, the Production Manager’s job has gotten more and more difficult, I think, and less--has really been diminished in stature in recent years, especially since the emergence of the Line Producer. What has happened, I think, the Unit Manager [Unit Production Manager] used to cover both jobs and really did cover both jobs. Well, what happened, the Unit Manager could not be on set all the time; had to go back and maintain his office duties. And the Producer’s feeling a need to want a representative at the Production Manager level on the set all the time, created the position of Line Producer. So the Line Producer is there on the set monitoring the activity all the time, as his direct communication. Well, what happened--this sort of diminished the Unit Manager to the office person to the person who is kind of taking care of things and running the office and diminished that rapport with the department heads and with the Director that he used--once used to have. So I think it, it’s been frustrating to see that diminished. [INT: It’s also, I think, part of the demission has come with the fact that the Production Manager wanting to maintain his DGA health benefits, DGA pension benefits, you know, but yet wants to move up, and has asked to function as a Line Producer, then assigns a lot of the routine UPM duties to a, to a Production Supervisor or to his Production Coordinator and, you now--] That’s a different, a different kettle of fish. I was speaking in terms of a Unit Production Manager and a Line Producer. [INT: Okay.] Now, in speaking of a, of a Line Producer who’s a Line [Line Producer]/UPM in order, as you say, to maintain his benefits or do both jobs, perhaps it’s a small enough show where he’s really a Production Manager, but he’s also getting a Line Producer credit, because it’s kind of the norm and perhaps it’s a way of getting him some over scale, additional salaries, ‘cause they say, “Well, we don’t pay Unit Production Managers that much.” Well, if you’re the Line Producer, you can negotiate a little more salary. So if he’s doing both of those functions, there’s a lot of them that are able to seriously do both of those functions and they don’t delegate the work to other people. And yet there are those who will almost delegate the entire job away to non-DGA personnel, which has been a problem for our Guild. And we’ve even, as you know, on the Administrative Committee seeing issues come through where, where the crews didn’t even know who the Production Manager was on the picture, thinking that the Production Supervisor or the Production Coordinator was actually the Unit Manager [UPM] on the show, because that was the person that had actually hired them and negotiated their deal. So there are problems in that and it’s a, it’s, unfortunately, diminished the role of the Unit Production Manager--

INT: Let’s go back to, to how, you know, it’s really--you’re a very good example of the transition in the industry. The fact that because there was a stable of Assistant Directors and Unit Production Managers who all worked together at one time or another at Universal [Universal Pictures], and same thing used to happen at Warner Bros. and all the studios: Paramount, whatever. So you got your jobs mainly because the Production Executive and the Production Manager [Unit Production Manager] said, you know, “Let’s use Tom, Tom Joyner on this project,” you know, or, “let's use him on that project,” or, “we’ve worked together before,” but now the First AD [First Assistant Director] in features is, is the Director’s choice. How does that change your networking? I mean, if you’ve only worked one, worked with one Director, how, then, do you get introduced to other Directors to expand your network?

TJ: Well, I think you do that by, by--you mean as a First [First Assistant Director], networking as a First? [INT: As a First, as a First.] Networking. It’s just networking with other Directors with other First ADs and with other Producers. I think you’re more--instead of networking with studios, you want to main--you wanna continue to network with studios, ‘cause I think it’s important that they be aware of who you are and your availability, because--I know of Gary Martin who used to say, his favorite line, “You pick ‘em, but we pay ‘em.” [Laughs] So you wanna make sure that you’re on the studio’s, you’re on the studio’s good side as well as on the Director’s good side. So I think you’re networking with the studios like you always do, because a lot of times the Director in looking, maybe the First that he’s worked with isn’t available, or maybe he’s looking for a First and then at the same time, you’re trying to, if you hear about a show coming up, you wanna be submitting your resume to that Director or perhaps speaking to Directors that you’ve worked with saying that, “I know that you’re not doing anything now, but this gentleman over here is and would you mind putting in a kind word for me?” [INT: Yeah. How do you, how do you go about…] I think you simply talk to--if it’s a--if you see a project coming up that you wanna work on with a Director and you don’t know that Director, you certainly submit your resume and do everything you can to meet him, but I think in order to, to bolster your opportunity if there’s Directors that you’ve worked with in the past that you might ask them to put in a recommendation for you.

INT: Now you said you also had worked, not a lot, but you had worked in episodic television that you said you did SEVEN BRIDES FOR SEVEN BROTHERS [TV series] and BEWITCHED.

TJ: Oh just--well, that was as a trainee, BEWITCHED. But I did as a Unit Manager [Unit Production Manager], I did a series of the WALKING TALL as we talked about, and then the series of SEVEN BRIDES FOR SEVEN BROTHERS and that was great fun. It was on distant location--[INT: Now, was--did you do these as a Production Manager [UPM]?] Yes. [INT: Oh you did them both as a Production Manager?] Yes. Yeah. Those are both as Unit Managers. And they were on distant location and the great thing about it was--[INT: Where were the locations?] It was in Murphys, California, which is up, just North of Sonora--[INT: They both were?] No. WALKING TALL was L.A. It was local location, Los Angeles. But it was on distant location, and we basically just set up everything we needed. We, and we stayed in the old hotel and we--there was a--they didn’t have enough hotel rooms up their to go around, so they were busing the crew up from Sonora. And what we realized we could do is instead of having all that travel time, which was really killing us, we would take that housing allowance and say, “Here, we’ll give you what we're spending in hotels as a housing allowance in cash and then you can go find your own place to live.” So as a result, a lot of people rented houses up in the Murphys area, which is much closer. And if two or three of them would go together in same place, they were really making a lot of money. Plus, we saved the travel time of having to drive all the way down the mountain roads to, to Sonora at the end of the day, so it was really advantageous for us to set it up that way--[INT: Was there a reason, was there a reason why you shot there as opposed to…] Other than the fact that David Gerber had a home there, it was beautiful countryside, right in the tall trees, national monument, and there--the countryside was great and we found a farm that would accommodate our needs that we were able to shoot at; had total control. We made an arrangement with a farmer to have his, to utilize his barn and the fields and the farmhouse as needed. And the sets were great and that little--it just really, we were able to write to accommodate to the small town of Murphys, where we could use the main street. The police were cooperative. We just--it was wonderful bringing--it was a very depressed area for employment, so people were, you know, glad to have the work opportunities. A lot of the local crew commuted from Stockton or came up to stay with us and we just had a great time.

INT: How would you contrast the work of a UPM [Unit Production Manager] in episodic television with the work of UPM in features?

TJ: Well, of course, in episodic television, you’re wrapping one, shooting one, prepping one, so you have all those three going on all the time and worrying about new scripts coming in and getting those initial boards down, so you’re always constantly going through that continual process and saying, “We’re not ready for this script. It needs to be brought down. This script isn’t ready for us,” or, you know, “what are we gonna shoot?” and trying to get that upcoming script to fit the pattern, and scheduled, and cast, and put together, so you’re always doing that prep work, and then shooting the show. I had a, I was blessed with some very good Firsts [First Assistant Directors] who ran a good set and were really great about getting the work done. And I used to go out and make sure that each Director knew that we wouldn’t, we weren’t working--David Gerber style was not to work overtime; we were pulling the plug at 7:12 and if, you know, just make sure that you finished the outside cast by the end of the day and if you don’t get all close-ups on the regulars, the next Director would be picking it up on a pick up day. So just making sure that they understood those rules. And all of the Directors were very grateful, because often times on shows, they weren’t told those rules. And, of course, wanting to make the best show possible, they were always pushing the envelope; trying to, if necessary, work the overtime or doing whatever they needed to do in order to make the best show possible. But knowing that the overtime wasn’t work, knowing what those rules were before hand allowed them to base--structure their day, base their work requirements on the amount of time allocated. And I used to always visit the set shortly after lunch just to see how the show was going and ask the Director, “Well, it’s three o’clock now, we’re quitting in four hours, we have this much to do, how do you feel?” [Laughs] And just--[INT: I have a funny feeling that’s not something you’d do in features?] No. You don’t do that in features, but in television, it’s something that you had to do just to make sure that they were mindful of where they were at the end of the day and what steps were they gonna need to do, and perhaps if it was necessary to simplify, combine a shot, drop a shot, whatever they wanted to do. But it was just necessary to kind of keep a little firmer control on the day. Now, in features, you don’t do that. There are, there are some smaller features where you wanna make them aware of where they are and if it’s a, if it’s a situation--I really think a First AD [First Assistant Director] needs to keep his Director aware of where they are at any time during they day regardless of how big the day is, because the Director may wanna expand certain shots, eliminate shots, give him that flexibility, but keep him aware of where he is. [INT: I don’t know how it is currently--] It’s done with a different manner. [INT: Yeah. I don’t know how it currently is in features, but I know that in television most First ADs [First Assistant Directors] will establish a timeline, a daily timeline--] A daily timeline. [INT: During prep, you know, and, you know, you might adjust it as the episode is being shot. But basically, you know, you come in and you know that at this point at lunchtime, hopefully you’ll, you will have finished.] Well, there are--well, it’s interesting. There are features and then there are features. There are the big budget tent pole pictures that if you have a problem and you don’t finish the day’s work, you’ll come back the next day or you’ll do it again, you’ll--there’s additional financing to make sure it’s done properly. On your smaller independents, there is no more money, there is no tomorrow. I mean it’s even a heavier hammer perhaps than television, because you don’t have a luxury of a pickup day for another Director to come in and pick up the days. If you don’t get it, it doesn’t get done. This is our only day at the location. And sometimes you really find yourself on those little independent features writing scenes out, cutting the script, changing it, doing whatever has to happen. If you have an emergency occur, the script is gonna suffer. There’s just no--I mean if you’re stuck, you lose it. If it’s not an insurable event, you’re gonna have to adjust your script accordingly.

INT: What are the unique things that you found about working on a musical? Actually, a musical and, you know, dancing with choreography and…

TJ: In the SEVEN BRIDES FOR SEVEN BROTHERS, it was interesting. We had a terrific, a terrific group. The music would come in; it was all basically done to playback. And it was--we had to fight for rehearsal time to get them to do it, but they would all, you know, have cassettes they would all take home with them. They would all learn the music, learned what they had to do. And then in a minimal time, minimal amount of time of rehearsal on set, ‘cause there really wasn’t a lot of time allowed on set. [INT: How did you adjust for the choreography, you know, for rehearsing the dance numbers?] Well, it was basically the Choreographer having to adjust to our schedule--what was taught him and he would go out there and work it out with himself and whoev--a couple of stand-ins. He'd kind of work out the basic choreography and then trying to get the cast when they weren’t shooting to go out and go through it with them, but they really had limited time to, to do it. [INT: How many days, how many days did you shoot those episodes?] You know, I think they were seven day, seven days. [INT: Wow!] I think they were seven-day shows. Yeah. [INT: That's a challenge.] Yeah. It was a challenge, it was a challenge.

INT: How has the industry changed over the last 30 years? I mean, you know, that might be an interview in itself.

TJ: Sure. Well, I think the, there’s a lot more visual effects, a lot more digital, a lot more, I think the audience is much more discerning now than it used to be. I think the style of filmmaking has changed quite a bit from the old proscenium style and staging to much more modern fast paced editing, short vignettes. It seems as though the attention span of the audience isn’t quite what it used to be. I think it’s so refreshing to come in and watch a movie that, that is perhaps shot in the old style, and they allow shots to play, and you can really watch the performance on a screen in a long master shot, and just--because it plays well. But you rarely have that opportunity now, ‘cause it’s just so fast paced. It’s two second cuts--[INT: But that’s, that’s the style of filmmaking, but what--how did the, how is the industry itself changed. You know, be it the studio structure, the independent film world, the, you know, the fact that--] Well, it’s gotten a lot more bureaucratic, I think. There’s a lot more guidelines with the, safety’s always been a concern, but with all the safety bulletins coming out, the sexual harassment, we don’t have the grab ass on the set that we used to have when we started out, the bureaucracy, the difficulty of working local locations, the length, the size of the production crews. I mean the crews are large, the motors, as I’ve said with cast, the amount of motor homes you have; you go out, and you used to park a crew with a few trucks, but now you go out and there’s 40 foots, 40 footers for every department, plus a 150 feet of motor home. And it’s difficult to find those locations where you can just go out and park, park a crew. If, you almost always now find yourself going out with a basecamp and then shuttling from a basecamp to the set. Whereas you used to do be able to tuck your crew, tuck your company in and around the set and get what you needed. Of course, so now that you’re shuttling, there’s additional vehicles needed and additional work to be done.

INT: What about the industry itself, though, I mean the--you say bureaucratic, you know, for example, most of the studios now are owned by much global corporations, how has that affected your role--we’ll get to your role as a production executive--but your role as a, or the role of the UPM [Unit Production Manager]? I think the First AD [First Assistant Director], probably, has not changed a lot, but the UPM, I think, his role has changed over the last 30 years.

TJ: Well, I think there’s more things to be aware of. There’s a little more reporting to do than there once was. You’re--before, you used to pretty much go out and make your picture and you’d report it to a producer. But now, there’s, oh gosh, I’m trying to think of all the levels that need to be reported to. I know, at legal there seems to be more concern over legal issues. And well, it’s just a much more licentious or litigious industry than it used to be. One thing that seems to be much more prevalent than it used to be was having to clear every piece of artwork, every piece of set dressing, making sure there’s legal clearance is done on everything. That’s become a bigger burden. The use of film clips, there’s a lot more working and prepping and finding and creating and getting clearances on film clips. It’s just a lot more--INT: I think the real case was several years ago when you--they shot an office building and there happened to be a public sculpture and after the fact, they had to get, they had to pay the artist, which--] Absolutely, absolutely. Or driving by and getting, you know, shooting inadvertently shooting murals, although the location was picked because the mural was there. It wasn’t so really inadvertent. But there’s a lot of things of research: who owns that mural? Who painted that mural? How did the piece of artwork get there? There’s a lot more concern than I think there used to be. And I think you have a lot more limitations in shooting on location than you used to have. Your curfews are more difficult in areas, having to get permissions. I mean it’s just not something you can go out and make arrangements to shoot overnight. [INT: We’re talking about Los Angeles. I mean, but if you, you know, if you went to another city, do you still have, I mean, artwork, of course, you have to clear artwork and locations, you have to arrange for locations, but I mean a lot of the other things that happen in Los Angeles, I don’t think you’re faced with in other cities.] Depending on the size of the town. Depending on, I mean, if you’re shooting in an urban center that’s had--it’s interesting, there’s been so much filming across the country now, it’s hard to find those unused spots or those places, I mean a lot of places are certainly more film friendly, but… Well, it was interesting--when I came into the film industry, there were maybe half a dozen universities and colleges that had film schools, but now every junior college and four year school has a, has a film school. And as a result, people are going through, getting their film degrees, they’re coming to California, they have their masters degree in film, and you find receptionists with masters degrees. The people, there’s just so much competition for the jobs here now, it… And the industry is changing, because with the advent of cable TV and satellite TV, of course, there’s so many more channels. You no longer have the three networks, four or five networks. They don’t command the advertising dollars, so the license fees aren’t available to make the same quality work that you used to make, because--it’s interesting, my grandchildren are spending more time playing video games than they are watching television. But program is being developed for cell phones; it’s being developed for computers. I mean, there’s always going to be a need for product, but they’re not gonna be as large budget a product as there al--I think that’s why you see so much reality TV now. There just aren’t the license fees available to produce these pictures. So the industry’s changing, there’s still the need for the amount of programming hours and pract--even gonna be improving with programing for television, programing for computers, programming for iPods, programming for cell phones. I mean there’s material that’s gonna be done, but it’s gonna be done in a different manner.

INT: But do you feel that, you know, you know, be it a TENDER MERCIES or a HILL STREET BLUES on television, you know, everybody was looking for quality, you know? I know on HILL STREET BLUES we used to screen dailies on a screen, on our projection screen. Now, now you get a DVD. Do you think that the industry is changing because--I mean what kind of quality do you need or want if it’s for a two inch, two inch telephone screen or a video game screen or a, or whatever. I mean do you think that we as an industry and we as society are losing something because we’re looking at it as material as opposed to works of art or…

TJ: Yes. Or just basic programming, yeah. Well, I think there’ll always be the time, the small pictures, the TENDER MERCIES. I mean it will always be an audience for that, for the, for the sm--it was a wonderful experience doing that picture. But there’ll always be a need for quality filming, but I don’t think it’s the prevalent. I think when they’re serving so many different masters, they’re just filling the air with programming. And of course, they have that wonderful residuals, the reuse of an existing program that’s gonna fill a lot of it, but then it’s gonna be edited and coopted. But I think a lot of that small stuff for a small screen is gonna be done with a little handheld camera, you know, the little, with much less equipment.

INT: Let me ask you a question, ‘cause we raised that and you commented on it, about TENDER MERCIES and the question I have is what--can you name, in each category, can you name let’s say the most complex or challenging program, not program, but complex or challenging project that you’ve ever done, the most memorable, the most enjoyable, you know, can you name them and be specific about what was the characteristic about it that made it challenging, memorable, or enjoyable and why, why--

TJ: Well one of the, one of the pictures that stands out is STARMAN. That was just a wonderful, wonderful opportunity we--[INT: Who directed?] That was John Carpenter and Larry Franco [Larry J. Franco] was the first Producer and Barry Bernardi was the second [co-producer] on it and I was the Production Manager [Unit Production Manager]. But we had a--we shot in Los Angeles to begin with. Then we went to Las Vegas, then we went to Winslow, Arizona, and from Winslow, Arizona, we went to Nashville, Tennessee, then to, let’s see, to Chattanooga and then to Manchester. And we shot in a little town called Tiftonia [Tennessee], but we were all over the place. One of the initial problems in reading the script is this big forest fire. Where do you go to say, “Gee, we’d like to burn down your forest.” Well, it’s was interesting. Tennessee has all these deciduous woods that they could care less about. It’s just old rotted trees and--[INT: How do you control a forest fire? I mean nowadays, nowadays, you’d probably do it visual effects and special effects, but…] Well, you’d probably would. We had a serious, major burn. In fact, there was so much moisture in the air and there’s so much humidity in the air, there’s so much dampness, we had difficulty getting the woods to burn. So what Roy Arbogast did, he had a PVC pipe filled with gasoline going up and down the trees, so we designated, it was all designated and boom, and these beautiful fireballs and fire and then we were able to control it and bring it down, ‘cause it was just really damp. So with a few fire trucks and fire hoses, we were really able to have good control. And they were happy to have their hillsides denuded of all these trees. It was wonderful. [INT: Let’s not go with the global warming and all of that stuff.] Exactly.[Laughs] [INT: But let me--okay, that’s a good thing in terms of--] But what was fun, the reason I go back to that picture--[INT: Now, now is that, was it an enjoyable movie, challenging, complex, how would you categorize it or all of the above?] Well, first of all, I think it was a terrific movie; it was a terrific cast. We really loved working--John Carpenter’s a wonderful Director to work with, has a wonderful caustic sense of humor--[INT: Who was your Second AD [Second Assistant Director]?] Second AD? I was the Unit Manager [Unit Production Manager], and Barry Bernardi was the Second, and Larry Franco was the First [First Assistant Director], who was also producing. He was Producer first. That’s because John Carpenter didn’t like Producers, so he figured if he made his First the Producer, he wouldn’t have to deal with Producers. So, but it was a wonderful picture. It was very complex due to all the different locations we shot in. There was a lot of preparation and bouncing hotels and travel and we had to have little air forces; flying into Winslow, Arizona was done with a group of small planes that we charted to go into Winslow and then chartering back to Las Vegas to flying on to Nashville; it was interesting working out the logistics of it. It was great fun having a production office that could go into trunks, get shipped, and be opened the next day. And just the logistics of--[INT: Who’s your production coordinator?] Production coordinator was, oh my goodness, she was wonderful and I--her name has to come to me here in a minute [Joyner is referring to Patricia Blau]. But she was definitely old school. She was a wonderful old school production coordinator and she used to insist on making coffee, insisted on bringing coffee, still took short hand, loved to take shorthand and she said, “I’m not a production coordinator, I’m a production secretary.” She just took great pride at being a production secretary. [INT: Ah yes!] She took great pride in her work--[INT: Talk about old school.]--and it’s what she did. She was just total old school and she was fabulous.