Ganja & Hess

Fima Noveck

This interview originally appeared in Video Watchdog in Issue #3, January/February 1991.

It was written by David Walker, and he and Tim Lucas have generously agreed to allow this reprinting.

This article is copyright Tim and Donna Lucas and may not be reprinted in whole or in part without their permission.

INTERVIEW WITH FIMA NOVECK:

Under his true name, F. H. Novikov, Russian-born Fima Noveck is the credited director of "Blood Couple" (a.k.a. "Double Possession"), the revised 1974 edition of "Ganja & Hess." Noveck was early enamored of movies and broke into the film industry as an editor and director of photography, later immigrating to New York, where he established himself as a one-man postproduction house specializing in tailoring imported features to suit the American palate. In addition to "Blood Couple," Noveck has "doctored" numerous imported features. His most noted success was his postproduction supervision of several Lina Wertmuller films, from "The Seduction of Mimi" (1972) to "Blood Feud" (1979). Noveck has resided in Los Angeles since 1986.

This interview was conducted by telephone on September 22, 1990.

DW: In the last several years, "Blood Couple" has started turning up on several video labels under several different titles.

FN: That I didn't know about. As a matter of fact, I had completely forgotten about the film until you approached me for this interview. It's not even on my resume.

DW: Your work on "Blood Couple" shows a lot of creative energy; did you take a special interest in this project?

FN: I take an interest in every project. I don't, shall we say, divide my energy into different points of intensity. When I take something on, that's it. In other words, I don't accept projects that I don't want to work on, because I put all of my energy into everything that I do; I live with it, for whatever period of time it takes.

DW: How much time did you spend working on "Blood Couple?"

FN: Six, maybe eight weeks. This picture was not only cut; the music was applied differently, it was re-edited, effects were added, all kinds of things. It was not a question of re-structuring the picture; it was a complete postproduction process.

DW: Did Bill Gunn assist you with any of the re-editing?

FN: No, but he liked what he saw when I showed it to him?

DW: He was complimentary?

FN: Yes. I'm always given caret blanche by directors. Then I come back and show them what I did.

DW: What was your personal opinion of Gunn's cut?

FN: Well, my own storytelling style is one of simplicity. I like a beginning, a middle, and an end--in that order. Of course, you're asking me what my feelings were 17 years ago, and I remember only impressions. My first impression was that I didn't quiet know what the picture was about. It was confusing to me. If I remember correctly, my feeling was that it was an attempt at being esoteric for the sake of being esoteric. In other words, the message that had to be conveyed to the audience demanded to be simplified. I remember having a feeling that the story was going somewhere, but that I couldn't see where it was going until I thoroughly analyzed it. So that's what I did.

DW: You reinstated a considerable amount of Gunn's outtakes.

FN: Usually, when a picture comes to me to go through a second postproduction, I discover that the best takes were not used originally. I invariably find gems in the outtakes of any film, so I always examine the outtakes, and I also print the B negative if it wasn't done before.

DW: I assume there was no new footage shot for "Blood Couple."

FN: No, there wasn't.

DW: I notice that alternate takes were used, and some of the footage was solarized.

FN: I always look at all the outtakes and, in this case, I found some stuff that I thought would fit the picture better than what was there before. The solarization I think I created. Now I remember: it was a negative/positive effect. It was done at an optical house.

DW: Did you make a special effort to retain the original film's flavor?

FN: In this case, yes, because the flavor was the thing that was so good about it. The flavor of the storytelling was the same. I always try to maintain the director's vision. I try to take a bird's eye view and see what the director wanted to say--something that maybe his editor, or whoever it was, wasn't able to tell very well--and I try to produce on screen the director's vision as concisely and clearly as I can. I'm always faithful to the director.

DW: That's your first loyalty.

FN: Absolutely. Well, that's not completely true. My first loyalty is to the audience, actually, and then to the director, so that his work can be shown and be entertaining. But from a purely creative point, yes, it's the director.

DW: What factors influence the billing you receive on a film? For example, you are credited on Mauro Bolognini's "The Inheritance" [Eredita Ferramonti, 1976] as editor and creative consultant, yet you are billed on "Blood Couple" as being its editor and director.

FN: I don't remember how or why I got that director's credit. I do remember changing my name so that it wouldn't appear twice. Well, I didn't really change it; my real name is Novikov, and I shortened it for use in this country. I suppose somebody thought I deserved it because I redirected the film so completely; I guess that's what it was.

** All Day Entertainment says:

Mr. Noveck is being a little self-serving in this interview. In fact, Bill Gunn at no point offered anything approaching compliments to Noveck for his "Blood Couple" cut. In fact, Gunn, producer Chiz Schultz, and editor Victor Kanefsky walked out of the "Blood Couple" screening in disgust before it was over, and demanded that their names be removed from the new version. All were appalled to learn that rather than credit the direction to "Alan Smithee," as is commonly case with films disowned by their creators, the new version in fact credits Noveck as director. Noveck is right, though, when he says he substantially changed the direction.

Fima Noveck
This interview originally appeared in Video Watchdog in Issue #3, January/February 1991. It was written by David Walker, and he and Tim Lucas have generously agreed to allow this reprinting. This article is copyright Tim and Donna Lucas and may not be reprinted in whole or in part without their permission.
	INTERVIEW WITH FIMA NOVECK: Under his true name, F. H. Novikov, Russian-born Fima Noveck is the credited director of "Blood Couple" (a.k.a. "Double Possession"), the revised 1974 edition of "Ganja & Hess." Noveck was early enamored of movies and broke into the film industry as an editor and director of photography, later immigrating to New York, where he established himself as a one-man postproduction house specializing in tailoring imported features to suit the American palate. In addition to "Blood Couple," Noveck has "doctored" numerous imported features. His most noted success was his postproduction supervision of several Lina Wertmuller films, from "The Seduction of Mimi" (1972) to "Blood Feud" (1979). Noveck has resided in Los Angeles since 1986. This interview was conducted by telephone on September 22, 1990. DW: In the last several years, "Blood Couple" has started turning up on several video labels under several different titles. FN: That I didn't know about. As a matter of fact, I had completely forgotten about the film until you approached me for this interview. It's not even on my resume. DW: Your work on "Blood Couple" shows a lot of creative energy; did you take a special interest in this project? FN: I take an interest in every project. I don't, shall we say, divide my energy into different points of intensity. When I take something on, that's it. In other words, I don't accept projects that I don't want to work on, because I put all of my energy into everything that I do; I live with it, for whatever period of time it takes. DW: How much time did you spend working on "Blood Couple?" FN: Six, maybe eight weeks. This picture was not only cut; the music was applied differently, it was re-edited, effects were added, all kinds of things. It was not a question of re-structuring the picture; it was a complete postproduction process. DW: Did Bill Gunn assist you with any of the re-editing? FN: No, but he liked what he saw when I showed it to him? DW: He was complimentary? FN: Yes. I'm always given caret blanche by directors. Then I come back and show them what I did. DW: What was your personal opinion of Gunn's cut? FN: Well, my own storytelling style is one of simplicity. I like a beginning, a middle, and an end--in that order. Of course, you're asking me what my feelings were 17 years ago, and I remember only impressions. My first impression was that I didn't quiet know what the picture was about. It was confusing to me. If I remember correctly, my feeling was that it was an attempt at being esoteric for the sake of being esoteric. In other words, the message that had to be conveyed to the audience demanded to be simplified. I remember having a feeling that the story was going somewhere, but that I couldn't see where it was going until I thoroughly analyzed it. So that's what I did. DW: You reinstated a considerable amount of Gunn's outtakes. FN: Usually, when a picture comes to me to go through a second postproduction, I discover that the best takes were not used originally. I invariably find gems in the outtakes of any film, so I always examine the outtakes, and I also print the B negative if it wasn't done before. DW: I assume there was no new footage shot for "Blood Couple." FN: No, there wasn't. DW: I notice that alternate takes were used, and some of the footage was solarized. FN: I always look at all the outtakes and, in this case, I found some stuff that I thought would fit the picture better than what was there before. The solarization I think I created. Now I remember: it was a negative/positive effect. It was done at an optical house. DW: Did you make a special effort to retain the original film's flavor? FN: In this case, yes, because the flavor was the thing that was so good about it. The flavor of the storytelling was the same. I always try to maintain the director's vision. I try to take a bird's eye view and see what the director wanted to say--something that maybe his editor, or whoever it was, wasn't able to tell very well--and I try to produce on screen the director's vision as concisely and clearly as I can. I'm always faithful to the director. DW: That's your first loyalty. FN: Absolutely. Well, that's not completely true. My first loyalty is to the audience, actually, and then to the director, so that his work can be shown and be entertaining. But from a purely creative point, yes, it's the director. DW: What factors influence the billing you receive on a film? For example, you are credited on Mauro Bolognini's "The Inheritance" [Eredita Ferramonti, 1976] as editor and creative consultant, yet you are billed on "Blood Couple" as being its editor and director. FN: I don't remember how or why I got that director's credit. I do remember changing my name so that it wouldn't appear twice. Well, I didn't really change it; my real name is Novikov, and I shortened it for use in this country. I suppose somebody thought I deserved it because I redirected the film so completely; I guess that's what it was. ** All Day Entertainment says: Mr. Noveck is being a little self-serving in this interview. In fact, Bill Gunn at no point offered anything approaching compliments to Noveck for his "Blood Couple" cut. In fact, Gunn, producer Chiz Schultz, and editor Victor Kanefsky walked out of the "Blood Couple" screening in disgust before it was over, and demanded that their names be removed from the new version. All were appalled to learn that rather than credit the direction to "Alan Smithee," as is commonly case with films disowned by their creators, the new version in fact credits Noveck as director. Noveck is right, though, when he says he substantially changed the direction.