A "New Generation" of Filmmakers

I keep reading ad nauseam on Bloody Disgusting (BD) about this "new generation" of filmmakers (BD head John Squires has used that phrase at least twice in the last week, that I can recall). 

 They're really selling this moniker and beating a dead horse with reminding us that this is now a thing.

Specifically, they are pointing to: 

Curry Barker and his movie Obsession.

Kane Parsons and his feature expansion of his YouTube series Backrooms.

And Mark Edward Fischbach (Markiplier) and his indie video game adaption Iron Lung. 

I have mixed thoughts on this phenomenon, but first let me explain my thoughts on each of the films listed above.

Iron Lung I bought tickets for last year (before Christmas) just based on the fact that it was an indie horror film with a limited release. I also knew, vaguely, that it was an adaptation of an indie video game. I guess I'd read about the game on BD because it has been on my Steam wish list forever. Anyhow, I heard my students talking about it, which surprised me, but shouldn't have (they are all really big fans of the Terrifier franchise... a franchise I have zero interest in). 

Regardless, I went to see Iron Lung at a local Marcus Theater that gets all the limited release and indie horror. It was a 10pm showing and it was in early January, the dead of winter (it was probably 5 degrees outside... my favorite weather). The theater was packed. I took it as a good sign that an indie horror film, based on an indie game, was drawing such crowds at 10pm on a wintry Friday night. Now, as for my take on the movie: for the most part it was brilliant. It was a bit of a slow burn (meaning a slog) to get through some of the running time, but the end was pretty awesome. 

When I heard my students talking about it later, I overheard them saying that Markiplier is a YouTuber. At first, I found this disappointing. But then my students told me all about his philanthropy and charitable giving. And, perhaps this is biased of me, but I also found out about his German heritage that endeared me to him immensely.

Now onto Obsession. Like most people, I was intrigued by the mysterious trailers shown before just about every single theatrical horror film. However, I totally called the "twist" (that the protagonist's wish would turn murderous). And, at the end of the day, it's the old "Monkey's Paw" story. 

What I loved about the film was the performances and what the director did with lighting, shadows and imagery. 

What I didn't love about the film was that the mythology wasn't consistent (or even logical... in terms of the diegesis of the film). There were lots of ideas that were left on the table and underdeveloped and that, I feel, weakened the film. 

Backrooms I have not seen yet, but I am seeing it next week at my local drive-in on a double feature with, coincidentally enough, Obsession.

I also want to point out that another, and perhaps the first that I saw, movie from an "influencer" was Talk to Me by Danny and Michael Philippou.

I hated that movie.

I won't go into my detailed reason why, but I have no desire to re-watch and re-assess that movie and I am appalled (but not surprised) that it is getting a sequel. The  Philippou's follow up movie (Bring Her Back) was, for me, slightly better, but still largely unoriginal, predictable and forgettable.

So, how do I feel about this new generation of filmmakers getting their start on YouTube?

As a general rule, I loathe social media. At first it was a free and easy way for me to keep friends (both stateside and abroad) abreast of my day-to-day life so that I didn't have to waste time on inconsequential details during phone conversations. I could keep intimate one-on-one calls to extremely personalized matters that I did not want to post for the world to read. 

However, social media has become a toxic playground for trolls, "influencers" (who mostly profit off the gullibility of those who follow them) and oligarchs seeking to disseminate misinformation  and hateful propaganda. 

I maintain social media account, honestly, mostly for movie, video game and music news. That's it. 

YouTube is a bit of a mixed bag for me. On the one hand, I hate that this new generation is addicted to ridiculous, nonsensical videos post on there (though TikTok is worse, in my humble opinion). On the other hand, I've received a lot of help playing video games and just generally finding life hacks and information on YouTube, so I can't dis it that harshly.

Bottom line: if this is the new generation of filmmakers (self-taught kids getting their start on YouTube) then there is literally nothing I can do about it (whether I love it or hate it).

And, in all honesty, I guess I haven't decided on which side of the fence I stand. 

On the one hand, these YouTube filmmakers are not that much different from the underground directors I loved in high school; the guys shooting movies on VHS and self-distributing their movies. I learned about these guys through a segment in the back of Fangoria called "Notes from the Underground". It was through them that I learned about local St. Louis filmmaker Eric Stanze (Savage Harvbest), J.R. Bookwalter (Ozone, The Dead Next Door), Kevin J. Lindenmuth (Vampires and Other Stereotypes) and the amazing Leif Jonker (Darkness). 

I guess I just give the above (underground) filmmakers a bit more credence, because they directed feature-length films and did everything guerilla-style (practical FX, using locations either illegally or through favors from friends, maxing out their credit cards to have a budget, etc.), whereas these YouTube guys typically have made shorts and had almost immediate dissemination through a digital pathway. Now, I shouldn't diminish the accomplishments of these YouTube filmmakers just because they had it easier (free, fast and digital distribution) than the filmmakers I grew up with (who had to film, edit, duplicate and distribute on VHS, then create box art and self-distribute it either through word-of-mouth, the (then) limited reach of the Internet or through printed resources like Fangoria). But it does seem like the filmmakers I grew up with had more grit than these youngsters today. 

I don't know. 

Regardless, the success of this new wave of YouTube filmmakers reinforces what my students have told me about the future of filmmaking: you need a social media presence and you have to go  viral for anyone in show business to even look your way or consider what you're doing to be valid.

I've been trying to go in the front door (via the reception desk) of Hollywood for over a decade now, and it's just not working. About two years ago, two of my students offered to film and edit a TikTok for me wherein I could promote my screenplays. I should have jumped on that idea when it was presented to me. I guess at this point, with a TikTok viral campaign in mind, I need to plan my next move.

This is the future, I suppose.

 Join the current, or stay on shore. 

I'm still going to submit my scripts to film festivals.

And still (perhaps) send out a query letter or two.

I'm on the fence about pitchfests. It seems like the more of them I do, the more I think they are scams, or that the "VIPs" that attend them are just sleepwalking through a financial agreement and are not really serious about finding any truly promising prospects.

A lot to think about here.

Off I go to ponder the possibilities.  

 

 

 

L.A. Indie Horror Fest

 Just submitted Personal Demons to the L.A. Indie Horror Fest.

 

Buzzwords

I swear, I just read about three articles on Blood Disgusting where some producer, director, studio head... whatever... tries describing their new horror film by calling it "elevated horror"...  see they called these films "smart horror" back in 2015, before they had these new, nifty buzzwords for it.

But this is just the latest in a long trend. 

See, back when I attended the (now defunct) PitchFest in Burbank, CA. the big buzzword was "Grounded" horror. I talked about it during my coverage of PitchFest 2015, but basically I decoded what agents, producers and execs were saying thusly: "... by 'grounded horror' I guess they mean a story with a family dynamic or some kind of dysfunctional character (melodrama, basically) where, if you take away the supernatural element, you still have a low-budget film about screwed up people; a story where the horror element is expendable and easily removable, essentially; a horror film that does not focus or rely on the horror…"

See these agents/producers/execs used the buzzword "grounded horror" without giving me a definition or explanation as to what that meant. They did, however, give me examples: It Follows, Babadook and The Conjuring... all movies I hated. 

Anyhow, "grounded horror" is still a bit of a buzzword. 

But others have replaced it now.  

"Folk horror" (which kind of means horror that it tied into folklore and folk tales... but really just describes any period-piece horror film) is big right now... largely due to the work is Robert Eggers.

"Body horror" is also having its first moment without David Cronenberg or Brian Yuzna starting the conversation. This is entirely thanks to the success of The Substance. 

And, finally, "queer horror" is having a moment. Mostly as an outlet for queer filmmakers who grew up on genre films, but for sis straight filmmakers, producers, execs, etc. it is basically a term they throw around to make themselves sound (and feel) very metropolitan and progressive. 

But more than anything studios want "elevated horror".

And what does that mean? 

Sure, it can mean "smart horror"... but really I've taken it to mean "pretentious horror". Horror that pretends not to be horror.

Or a horror film that isn't such a horror film, you know?

Basically a horror film that someone doesn't have to feel ashamed while watching or telling someone that they saw it. 

It, supposedly, speaks to a "higher minded" (they would say "sophisticated"... I'd say "pretentious" yet again) audience.

I suppose A24 are the undisputed "kings" of "elevated horror".

I don't know.

It's all just grandiose, pompous nonsense to me.

But, whatever.

I'll start calling Personal Demons "elevated" or "grounded" horror in meetings and in my cover letter.

I don't care.

Whatever gets me into the door.  

 

 

International Horror Hotel Film Festival Rejection

Just got this email Thursday night...

Not going to lie, this is disheartening.

This is my 3rd festival rejection of 2026 and my fourth rejection in 6 months.

Has the magic worn off?

Has my luck run out?

Or am I just in a bit of a dry spell?

I guess I am just so impacted by these recent rejections because I am so used to winning. Thus far I have 19 either wins or near-wins since 2019. I suppose no one can maintain that impressive of a track record for that long (7 years!). It's just disheartening that I haven't had a win yet in 2026. 

However... onward I trudge.  

Hi Erik D., Thank you so much for submitting your work to the Horror Hotel Film Festival. We truly appreciate the time, creativity, and passion that went into your project. After careful review by our programming team, we regret to inform you that we are unable to include your film/script in this year’s lineup. While we were fortunate to program a large portion of submissions this year, this was still not an easy decision. This year, we received over 240 submissions from around the world and selected approximately 175 projects for the festival. Even with this expanded program, a number of strong entries—including yours—could not be accommodated due to programming balance and scheduling limitations. Our team considers not only the quality of each project, but also how it fits into the overall festival experience in terms of tone, theme, and audience flow. Please know that your work was genuinely appreciated, and we encourage you to submit again in the future. We’ve had many filmmakers join us in later years after not being selected initially. We’re grateful you chose Horror Hotel as a home for your work, and we hope to see what you create next. If you are interested to find out our current schedule, nominations and panels of lectures, please visit our website www.horrorhotelfilmfest.com Thank you again for being part of our community. Warm regards, Horror Hotel Film Festival Team

 

A "Pitch" Meeting I Had 11 Months Ago

It has now been nearly 11 months since I made my first pitch through Stage 32.

The "VIP" I pitched to has had my script since early July 2025 and I am thoroughly convinced of two things:

1.) Stage 32 is a scam website, preying on the hopes and dreams of gullible aspiring screenwriters.

2.) This "VIP" is, obviously, never getting back to me.  

 Thus, now I feel it is time to tell my story...

So, on Wednesday, July 2^nd, 2025 I had a Zoom pitch meeting through Stage 32 with an executive / producer who, apparently, has worked with Sony and Columbia Pictures. What they have done for those companies, I don’t know… and should’ve probably investigated.

But I digress.

Anyhow, I won’t say this guy’s name, because I don’t want to burn any bridges.

But he was specifically reading horror and thriller scripts.

He was also 2 minutes late to our 10-minute pitch meeting.

He came on screen and had kind of a Mark Zuckerberg look (though his profile picture on Stage 32 makes him look a bit like an older Jason Flemyng). He’s also young (I’m pretty sure he’s younger than I am). He also had something of a dude-bro douchbaggy arrogance about him. Furthermore, he seemed to be seated on the patio of an outdoor café (probably a Starbucks… or the ultra-hip, ten-times-as-expensive L.A. equivalent) and had sunglasses on. How utterly unprofessional! The guy couldn’t even look me in the eye!

Yikes!

He did apologize for being late and complimented me on my Wes Craven tribute shirt (which I made myself, eleven years ago when he passed…every time one of my heroes passes, I get a shirt made for them).

We did the usual niceties and asked how one another was doing, etc.

I then told him to tell me when he was ready.

I then launched into my elevator pitch which, essentially, outlines the concept, the overall plot, a basic sense of the characters and my inspirations for writing this (to give them an idea of the “feel”/mood/tone/vibe of the film).

When I reference The Monster Squad he said cut in and mentioned that it reminded him of that movie. Which is fine, that’s what I’m going for. But it was a bit jarring. That and, I’m sorry, but historically I have not met that many people who’ve seen Monster Squad. But I guess if you are a horror-centric producer, you’ve seen it.

I then alluded to the fact that Personal Demons has just had its 16^th film festival win.

Usually this is the point where “VIPs” ask me for the highlight reel of my festival wins.

He just asked me (basically), “So… what… you submitted it to these competitions… and it won?”

… Yeah. That’s literally what I just said. Why was it necessarily to confirm that?

I mentioned that, occasionally, I’d only get an “honorable mention” or something, but typically I was an official selection, or I won some award or recognition.

He asked me about the demon in my script and to explain it a bit more, because (he said) the antagonistic nearly always gets the short end of the stick… Which is odd. How many horror franchise villains (Freddy, Jason, Chucky, Pinhead) can the average person name off the top of their head… and how many final girls can they name (by the character’s name… not just the actor’s name)?

I told him that my model for the demon was the Xenomorph in the first Alien film (and some of the sequels) and that, while it was cut from the same cloth as archetypal demons, that the script stayed with the demon for a lot of the story, so you got a sense of his agenda, his motivation and his movements. I also said that I reveal the mythology/theology of the story (with specifics to the demon) in a moment of confrontation between the protagonists and the antagonist (I compared it to when Nancy confronts Freddy at the end of Nightmare on Elm Street). I won’t give the details I gave him, because they are sacred to me and I don’t want anyone pilfering them, but he seemed impressed, smiled and said he liked that detail.

He asked what the demon’s name was.

I told him it didn’t have a name and he seemed okay with that.

He then asked if I saw this being a PG-13 movie, or R. Or if I saw it being “like Stranger Things” where there was violence, but not too much.

I told him that I wrote it as an R film (with hard gore) because it was modeled after the movies from the 80’s-90’s that I grew up on, movies that took no prisoners. But I (lied and) said that it could be trimmed down to PG-13 with only a few snips to a few scenes. I then said it could have “an unrated 4K”. He smiled and snickered at this. I firmly believe that, if you love movies, you love physical media.

He asked me when I wrote this movie.

I was honest and told him ten years ago (at the time, remember this was July of 2025), before Strangers Things and the 2017 adaptation of It came out, and that I was a bit frustrated that those movies kinda stole my thunder. He said, “No, that’s actually good for you!” I guess meaning people want similar stories to ones they already love… and both those IPs are huge hits, so…

I also said that I didn’t really do anything with the script until 2019, when I started sending it out to film festivals. Then it started winning and I figured I should do something with the script.

He also how long I had been doing Stage 32. I told him just a week. That a random email showed up in my inbox and I decided to try it and see what it was like. I think that either surprised or impressed him. Can’t tell which.

Now comes the part I really want to talk about…

 

Then he started critiquing my pitch.

He hewed and hawed and, basically told me that I needed to talk about the characters more, give them names, let the VIP know about their relationships.

He then started throwing stuff out.

“Do they start out as friends?”

“What brought them together?”

“Is one of them a bully?”

He said that I should have launched into the structure of the story more and maybe told how the script starts out (I guess he meant the inciting incident?).

Again, he started throwing stuff out (projections that I guess were fueled by his own “creativity”):

“Does the town cover up that it’s a demon killing these kids?”

“Is there another town involved?”

“Is it an urban legend about this demon?”

He then started throwing out all kinds of buzz words, telling me that including the characters, their relationships, the story structure (I guess he meant the beats of the story… like the plot points in Syd Fields’s three-act structure) and the world building which would make my pitch “more grounded… make it feel more earned”.

I honestly, in his California surfer-dude accent and his scatterbrained buzz word vomit, couldn’t tell what part of my pitch he was criticizing more, or which part he thought I should have accentuated more in my pitch.

But he kept telling me which parts of my pitch he liked. He said my pitch “was strong” and that he appreciated knowing that it was set in a “mining town” (I guess that catered to his need for world-building), he said he liked the concept, and he said I did a good job of making it unique and making it mine (this is after telling me it reminded him of Monster Squad).

Now, what aggravates me the most about this (and I should say that, if memory serves, I’ve never had this kind of criticism from an agent… this must be purely a producer thing… or just specific to this person) is that I’ve always been told to give my elevator pitch first (the short and sweet version) to see if they are interested. This should be brief, but impactful and should outline the basic story, the concept, a vague understanding of the characters and (perhaps) what your inspirations were in writing this. Maybe that last part is not part of the typical pitching formula, but it’s always netted me good results. When I told one agent that Critters was an inspiration for this script, he thanked me for mentioning that film, told me he was friends with Dee Wallace and then we geeked out about Dee Wallace’s horror filmography, with specific emphasis on the Critters movies. That kind of stuff endears you to the people you pitch to and sometimes, like with the story I just gave, offers you an “in” with them.

But the bottom line is: you give them the basics. The logline. The elevator pitch.

If they want to know more, if they’re even remotely interested, they’ll ask.

I just don’t understand why this guy couldn’t just have just asked me questions to fill up the rest of the piddling few minutes we had left, instead of (passive aggressively) reading me the riot act (that’s how I took it) and criticizing my pitch for future reference (which is just a big red flag that he is already unsure, or has his reservations about my pitch and, thus, my story, my script and my writing… I see this as being a big “no” even before he “reads” it).

I would have answered his questions (I had answers to all his multitude of questions and info. to satisfy all his criticisms ready to go) if he had actually asked them. Instead, I felt exhausted and, honestly, crushed when he blathered on about what he would have changed about my pitch.

 

Another thing that angers me to no end is that these VIPs make it seem like such an imposition to show up to these pitch meetings (even though they are getting paid to be there and, who knows, they might find their next client and the next “It” screenwriter… though most of them resign themselves to the fact that these pitchfests are a wasteland of untalented nobodies and they are just making some extra vacation cash by showing up and even pretending to consider the pitches given to them). And, as such, we are given precious little time with these VIPs.

For Stage 32 your pitch meetings (via Zoom… which is good that they’re at least technologically up-to-date… FadeIn uses Skype (!) for their virtual meetings during Hollywood Pitchfest) are ten minutes. Period. Then you get cut off and the Zoom meeting involuntarily ends… And this guy wasted two of those minutes by being late. So, we only had eight minutes. My pitch is a practiced and honed 3-5 minutes that covers all my bases and leaves room for questions. If I had lengthened my pitch to include everything he wanted (in-depth character detail and analysis, a sense of the world-building, the story structure/beats, etc.) my pitch would’ve been (and I’m guestimating here) about 7-9 minutes. Which leaves no room for questions or criticism. And if there’s anything I’ve learned about agents and producers, they don’t want you to talk the entire time. They want their voices to be heard and their comments, questions and criticism to be part of the pitch. They are a very self-important lot… even the agents with no famous clients and the producers without a credit (or notable credit) to their name.

I even pitched to an agent once who, after I thoroughly impressed him with my pitch, said,
“Well, I need to get a sense of the story beats… but I’ll get those when I read it.”

I don’t know.

In the end this VIP seemed about 30% “into” my pitch, and 70% married to his criticism about how my pitch could’ve been better.

He said, “I definitely want to take a look at it”, but it seemed like a begrudging afterthought.

I asked him how that worked, as I am new to Stage 32. He said he would request the script through Stage 32 for me to send to him to read.

As I write this (just hours after my pitch) we shall see if he actually does request my script.

If he does, and I am not holding my breath, I am fairly certain he will sit on for months before I start asking (while being respectfully persistent) until he finally shoots me down near the end of the year (if not longer).

But time will tell.

 

Update: Well, this “VIP” did indeed request my script (the next day, on Thursday, July 3^rd, 2025… I thought I’d written about that extensively in my blog… guess I didn’t).

Then, on September 29^th (88 days… nearly three months later) I wrote Stage 32 to see what the holdup was. They emailed me back with some frustrating placating. I wrote about it here.

As I write this now it is mid-May of 2026 and it has been 11 months since he requested my script.

Yeah, this dude is not getting back to me.

He was picking up some extra fun money for the weekend.

What a crock!

 

Afterthought: I went back and re-read the bio of the guy I pitched to.

Here it is (I am paraphrasing it from Stage 32’s site… but I have layered in my own commentary here and there):

 

Basically he was a “creative executive” at a major film studio (which is also a popular electronics brand). He co-produced a children’s movie based on a 30+ year old video game adaptation (of which there have been several sequels).

 

Apparently, he has requested 12 scripts and 2 meetings from their last Pitch Session!

He was also the “assistant” to a major movie producer (whose production and name is everywhere) who specializes in exploiting popular horror IPs and preying on fanboy nostalgia.

I don’t know. This guy didn’t seem old enough to have worked on all these projects.

I’m guessing he is another guy who was grandfathered into the Hollywood system (by the usual means, unique to the American entertainment industry) and is now just kind of bumming around Hollywood, throwing his limited clout around like a sledgehammer, just ‘cuz he can.

This guy’s work on “horror” is limited and is relegated to a lot of modern fluff horror (and the aforementioned IP exploitation).

In short: I really resent this guy wasting my time, money, taking my script, getting my hopes up (however little hope I gave this situation) and trying to talking to me like he’s John Carpenter.

 

Another Stage 32 "opportunity"

So, I got this email in my inbox.

It's  one of the hundreds of emails I get from Stage 32 each week since I first pitched with them about a year ago.

It's asking me to submit to the Stage 32 x Witchcraft Motion Picture Company Contained Genre Screenwriting Contest.

 Now, I am not gonig to submit to it.

Why?

1.) At this point, I am thoroughly convinced that Stage 32 is a huge scam (like the Tracking Board before it) and they have no real intention (or way) of getting my script made, getting it into the hands of someone who can make it or getting me representation of any kind.

In all reality, I think all the "success stories" they share at the bottom of this content are wholly B.S. Made up names, made up scripts, possibly even made up agents and agencies.

2.)   If you look at the movies this "Witchcraft Motion Picture Company" has made... it is all "thrillers" or "grounded horror" (which can mean a number of things, depending on who is using that buzz word... here I think it means that the horror of the screenplay could actually happen... meaning no supernatural or otherworldly horror).

The only movie I see that they've had a hand in that is supernatural is the (IMHO) atrocious Night Swim.

I think my $50 (and hundreds more if I opted for all their other B.S., like coverage (which I'm sure would be scathing) and the chance to resubmit... I'm sure after buying even more of their overpriced services, like "script doctor" services to make sure that my script is up to snuff... which, how much do you want to bet, they would reject it again anyhow...) can be better spent elsewhere.  

 

 

 

  

Randomness

 Two things:

1.) I am contemplating putting all of my novels (even the many unpublished ones) up on Amazon in Kindle format. 

At least them maybe some people will read what I've written. 

They will be sold for $1 (as profit is not really my concern... though it would be nice to live off of my writing... it'd be even nicer to be so financially endowed that I wouldn't have to worry or work again... just write and live... that's the dream). 

Hopefully the price an d the synopsis alone will enough to intrigue readers to pony up the $1. Hopefully one of those readers might be an agent or a publisher. 

Who knows.  

2.)  I now have ideas for a serial killer novel I conceived of nearly a quarter of a century ago. I am thinking of starting it this summer, if indeed I get through the other projects I have in mind. Now, this will undoubtedly go before the novel I have been dreaming about writing for 25 years (Dirt Nap), but as I feel that Dirt Nap will most likely be my opus, I feel I have to wade back into the waters of novel writing with an idea that carries with it less stakes, if that makes sense.