MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

True-life apocrypha: Melton Barker, auteur

Melton Barker? Chris Garcia of Austin American-Statesman makes the question more than rhetorical, the gorgeous enigma of “a man who has seemingly, and utterly, disappeared.” Too true to be good? “The man is Melton Barker. He made many movies, two-reelers featuring small-town children that mimicked popular Hollywood fare of the time… the Depression and the Golden Age.
Melton Barker.jpg
“When she talks about her quarry, [Caroline] Frick, a film archivist and historian… at the University of Texas, lights up with a tangy fusion of fevered fascination and lip-pinching frustration. Since 2001, Melton Barker has wrapped his ghost around Frick’s head, haunting her dreams, work, life. Barker made so-called itinerant films… from documentaries to lightly veiled ads for local stores… He shot and screened the movies for an invariably delighted community, and likely made a comfy living.” Barker, Frick tells Garcia, shot in several states between the 1930s and 1950s. A naming of eight Texas towns is fragrant: “Austin, Waco, Childress, Munday, Keller, San Marcos, Huntsville and Quanah.” … [Frick’s] imperishable commitment to the case, has a big fat hole in it. She cannot discover who the man was, or where he went. No birth certificate. No obituary. Just a name, some movies and a lot of air… “There have been times when it’s all-consuming… My father came to visit and I brought it up and he said, ‘Seriously. Is this all you talk about? This is really scary.’ … Who is this guy who traveled from town to town? What was he thinking? Where has he not gone? Then I found out he was a Texan, and that solidified it.” … Under the banner of Melton Barker Juvenile Productions, the roving filmmaker would place an ad in the local paper offering to put children ages 3 to 12 in the movies for $10 a child—an opulent sum in the Depression paid by parents giddy to watch their children… Lead roles were auditioned. [Then] up to 125 other children just paid the fee and showed up. As a filmmaker, Barker had a genius for jangly messes…”They’re fabulous. They’re fantastic… They’re so bad that they’re so good… I’m not going to lie to you.” [Lovely, loving anecdotes reel on at the link; the ending of Garcia’s telling is marvelous. There are also clips of Barker’s legacy at the link.]

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Movie City Indie

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon