Dope on the Rope
Thursday, June 21, 2007
I have had the pleasure of speaking to Andrew Denton a number of times and he remains one of my favourite interviewers for several reasons â including his humour, intelligence and ability to be both interesting and interested. However, when I first spoke to him regarding Enough Rope, I felt the need to take issue with some of what I perceived to be shortcomings of his work â like letting Rene Rivkin and Rachel Griffiths off the hook a little too easily when he interviewed them (I blogged about this at the time â not knowing I would subsequently interview Denton about the show, for FilmInk, in honour of the first Enough Rope DVD release). Surely calling a show Enough Rope was a reference to the phrase âgive âem enough rope to hang themselvesâ. Why did conversation always turn to child rearing? What happened to the angry young Denton? Did he have to mellow so annoyingly?
Iâd first had the pleasure of interviewing Denton when he had nothing at all to promote. His time on breakfast radio was drawing to close â although I didnât know it â when I happened to accost him in public. He was happy to be interviewed but the finished product unfortunately never saw the light of day. I was writing for the street press then and since there was no potential for advertising revenue, they had no particular desire to publish a profile of one of my heroes. As I wasnât yet blogging and I hadnât made the acquaintance of the right editor at some party, there didnât seem to be another outlet for it.
One of the things that came up during that chat was Dentonâs belief that documentary as a form of entertainment was going to take off. He likened it to non-fiction literature, that had overtaken fiction in the best-sellers lists. So when I got to speak to him about his new television show, I put it to him that Enough Rope was the televisual equivalent of ânon-fictionâ entertainment. Although he didnât quite agree, Denton has since made good on his instincts regarding documentary with God On My Side. (And since it was broadcast within the [More Than] Enough Rope slot, Enough Rope may not be television doco, but television doco can certainly be Enough Rope.)
In the course of the Enough Rope interview, Denton also pointed out that his show wasnât about taking interview subjects to task â that his use of the title was about giving people the opportunity to do rope tricks, rather than hang themselves. He explained his take on all of the things I took issue with and allowed me to see another side (not necessarily âthe other sideâ, note), pointing out that an interview is like taking a picture, and if I donât like the interview, really, Iâm only taking issue with his choice of camera angle. I liked the metaphor, but more importantly, I liked the point he was making. It gave me the opportunity to re-evaluate the work and what I thought I didnât like about it. Itâs not every day that someone invites you to voice a criticism of his work, to his face, and have him address your criticism, all in a rational manner.
One of the things that I wanted to know about Enough Rope â particularly when it came to the DVD release â was with regards to where edits had clearly been made in the interviews. What was it that didnât make the final cut? And why couldnât âextended versionsâ of the original broadcasts â with some of the edited material re-instated â have been included on the DVD? After all, thatâs pretty much what DVDs are for. âYou know what?â Denton said, âthere just isnât the time, unfortunately.â
Thankfully, time has made itself available. Iâm really enjoying More Than Enough Rope, the series of Enough Rope currently being broadcast that re-visits some of the best interviews, re-instating some of the bits that were originally cut. More than that, the interviews often pause in order to allow Denton to offer some commentary about the proceedings. Again, this is what DVD is supposed to provide. How cool is it that weâre getting it for free on the telly? No doubt one day all entertainment will have the âextended with commentaryâ option â but weâll have to pay a little bit extra each month to be able to download and enjoy it.
At this point, the logical thing for me to do is revisit that FilmInk interview, and present it in itâs original question-and-answer form. It serves as a follow up to my earlier blog about the show, since it addresses â as Denton did â my original criticisms. I promised at the time to follow up and present the other side of the story. Itâs only taken me about three years!
Iâd also like to add a bit of trivia I discovered a little while ago. The title Enough Rope originally graced a radio show hosted by Meshel Laurie and Josh Kinal on Melbourneâs Triple R. That program no longer existed by the time Andrew Denton wanted to use the title for his television show. There is no provision to copyright a title, and so anyone can use a pre-existing title if they want to, even if the other thing with that title still exists. However, Denton still made contact, to ensure that it was okay to name his show Enough Rope, despite having no obligation to do so. I love it when a powerful person makes an effort to behave honourably, even if he doesnât have to.
After that rather long introduction, here is the long interview.
Dom Romeo: Andrew, is it okay if I start by hitting you with a quote from an interview we did some years ago?
ANDREW DENTON: Go ahead.
Dom Romeo: You said,
âDocumentary is the great unexplored form of entertainment; ten years ago, non-fiction was the ugly cousin of publishing. Now non-fiction is the thing; thatâs where the best-sellers are. I firmly believe the same of documentary. I believe that documentary could become the non-fiction of feature film, done right.â
Is Enough Rope the televisual equivalent?
ANDREW DENTON: No, not really. I donât see it as documentary. Itâs conversation. Itâs a different thing. And itâs not something that would readily translate to cinema, I donât think, although probably The Fog of War belies that.
Dom Romeo: Where did the concept of Enough Rope come from? Itâs kind of like a chat show, but a chat show done the way âchatâ hasnât been done for quite some time.
ANDREW DENTON: I quibble with the term âchatâ; âchatâ is something that you do over the back fence when youâve got five minutes. I sit down and talk to people for an hour or longer. I donât mean to sound wanky, but itâs a conversation. I think âchatâ speaks of a whole different genre, which Iâve also done, which is usually a few anecdotes, a few laughs, a joke here and a product endorsement. I donât think Iâm doing that.
Where the idea came from was sitting out of television for a long time, and particularly watching the rise of reality television, feeling very strongly that there was too much chat and not enough conversation, and usually the chat happened to be about the same few subjects â a lot of them revolving around reality television. I felt, watching shows like Australian Story and listening to things on the radio like The Search for Meaning, that in fact, at a particularly stressful time in world history that weâre undeniably living through, that many people wanted to talk about matters much closer to their hearts, and that were bothering them, than simply what the latest evictee from Big Brother was like.
Dom Romeo: Is that just symptomatic of the state of the world at the moment? Entertainment seems to be the âopiate of the massesâ.
ANDREW DENTON: No, I think sport is the opiate of the masses. And Iâm a willing partaker of it on occasion. I think entertainment is a distraction, not an opiate.
Dom Romeo: You referred to the things that we hold dear to us: how does that manifest itself on Enough Rope?
ANDREW DENTON: The simplest way to put that is you will see a lot of times when I talk to people, we talk about their own parents or their own children, the fundamental things of society. Itâs not to do with what youâve earned or who youâve met; itâs not what youâve earned, itâs what youâve learned. I think thatâs one of the strong senses Iâve had, and discerned in the people Iâve had around me â we feel like our society is fracturing; we feel like itâs fracturing under the weight of trivia and under the weight of so many distractions â going back to the point about entertainment; and we feel like itâs under threat from a very dark force, which is fundamentalism. And the very spiritual strength of fundamentalism underlines in some ways our spiritual weakness and our weakness as a society, as a group of people who care for each other. So when I talk about parenting or children, thatâs talking about the fundamentals of society: how we deal with other human beings.
Dom Romeo: There were times when I felt that, because you have a young child, you always seem to bring up the âyoung childâ topic in the interview if your interview subject also has a young child. Although it seemed more pertinent for your âAustralian of Yearâ interview with Professor Fiona Stanley in which you discussed the growing incidence of drug addicted parents and depressed children. How important is it that we address procreation and children as issues central to where weâre going as a society?
ANDREW DENTON: Well, itâs about as important as the future. Theyâre the next generation. Whatever we do now will shape the next twenty years. And whatever our kids do will shape the twenty years after that. As we all know, the way weâre parented has a profound influence on how we deal with the world. So it couldnât be more important.
Dom Romeo: Did you have any idea when you were younger, before you started a family, how important the family was? Were you always aware of that?
ANDREW DENTON: Look, I come from a very strong family, as does Jennifer [Byrne, Dentonâs partner], and one of the reasons we get on so well is that weâre great believers in âfamilyâ. Family takes care of family. But thatâs on a personal level. On a societal level, no, I think you begin to understand it more when you become a parent and when you talk to other parents and start seeing the school community. You begin to see how many problems are shared and how many problems are different.
All this is important to the show, but the mission statement for the show is âwhere entertainment and ideas meetâ. Itâs okay to be entertaining, itâs okay to have ideas; they donât have to be mutually exclusive.
Dom Romeo: What about the title of the show, âEnough Ropeâ? Iâm familiar with the phrase âenough rope to hang himself withâ. You donât often seem to let âem hang. You donât let âem dangleâ¦
ANDREW DENTON: No, and for a very good reason. I think a good title is good for a show, and I based the title of the show on this very simple guide: if I just arrived from overseas and knew nothing about what was on TV and only had the guide to go by, Iâd pick the show with a neat title. So, for instance, I would have watched The Money or the Gun, even if I didnât know anything about it. So I think Enough Rope is a really good title. But having said that, yes, the saying is âenough rope and theyâll hang themselvesâ, but my view is always, âenough rope, and if youâre good, youâll do rope tricksâ.
The whole purpose of the show is not set up to trap people or to trick them. The whole purpose of the show is to let people shine and thatâs one of the things weâve found. As we talk to people and give them a chance to talk about things away from the normal publicity rounds, most of the people I speak to, theyâre where theyâre at because theyâre intelligent, they work really hard, theyâve got a world view.
Dom Romeo: Well that puts the Rene Rivkin interview into perspective. The first time I watched it I thought you went a little easy on him. You didnât take him to task on his alleged wrong-doing. Watching it again, I realise that none of that has anything to do with you letting him tell his story.
ANDREW DENTON: No, and with very good reason. The chronology of this â and we should get it very clear â first of all, we asked him to come on the show well before the legal stuff happenedâ¦ in public, anyway. I asked him to come on the show because Iâd seen him on Clive Robertson a decade earlier and never forgotten him; he was so interesting. And the night in fact he came on the show was before heâd been found guilty of anything. We knew he was before the court, but there was no point in discussing something that a) was before the court; and b) something that hadnât been decided. And indeed, what we saw and found there was the marvelously flamboyant and eccentric individual that Rene Rivkin is. The second interview, which was in fact after he was found guilty, was a different interview all together. One that Rene left extremely unhappy from, because he was asked a great deal about his business dealings, and about the fact that heâs been found guilty. He was extremely unhappy.
So itâs very easy for people â and I think people have â to take that first interview and say, âyou were just giving a criminal a free rideâ. He wasnât a criminal at the time, and he was and still is a fascinating man that I hate to think weâll kick to death regardless of what heâs done wrong.
Dom Romeo: What are the criteria for the selection of guests for the show?
ANDREW DENTON: People who we feel have led enough of a life to be interesting â or who have enough of a view of life to be interesting. And they can be different categories. There have been actors and famous people that weâve said no to, not because theyâre not famous enough, but because they perhaps havenât been around for long enough to have really formed a view on life. And then there are other people we choose who arenât famous at all, but whose attitude towards life, or what theyâve done with their life, is really instructive and extraordinary. Itâs pretty simple but theyâre interesting enough to sustain a longer conversation, as opposed to a âchatâ.
Dom Romeo: Tell me about the ânon-celebrityâ guests. Itâs an interesting and vital angle that no other conversation show or chat show has dealt with.
ANDREW DENTON: It was actually the starting point for the show. Some years ago I remember watching Parkinson, and wondering what the same show would be like â with the band and all of that â but if you just spoke to people that no one had ever heard of. When I first was putting together the outline of Enough Rope in fact I envisaged a show with no celebrities at all. Now that was a fairly âStalinistâ view, which was wrong for two reasons: one, because it assumed that people who are celebrities hadnât led interesting lives, which is manifestly untrue, as Mel Brooks showed early this year; and two, because part of the secret to the showâs success is that any given week, when you tune in, you donât know what youâre going to get. If we had completely excluded entertainers and performers, it would have limited our palette greatly.
So it comes from all the TV shows Iâve done; whenever Iâve had a break in taping Iâve gone and spoken to members of the audience, and I have been, almost without exception, astonished by what people have to say. You just never know who is going to amaze you with something they have to say, be it an opinion or something from their lives. Iâve often walked up the street and thought, âI could walk into any house here and with the right questions, I could unlock one thing in this personâs life, be it a relative or something theyâve done, which is astonishingâ.
So it comes from that and the thought that we have spent so much time in the last ten years elevating celebrity to a religion that again, getting back to that idea of âsocietyâ and âvaluesâ, I think weâve actually forgotten that the far more interesting, or the equally interesting people are next to us on the bus or the train. Iâm not a great believer in religions of any sort and I think the religion of celebrity is a particularly stupid one, and I just wanted to remind all of us, I suppose â myself included â that the so-called âordinaryâ is more extraordinary than those things that are promoted as extraordinary.
Dom Romeo: So what youâre doing, when you do interview celebrities, is trying to provide enough comfort and freedom for them to reveal something about themselves.
ANDREW DENTON: Thatâs something that weâre all aiming for. We research a lot, and really, there are two schools of thought on this â some people think that the approach is too soft, but my view is, thereâs a lot of adversarial television around, thatâs not really what Iâm interested in doing. I think if you sit there with a searing list of questions, trying to tear someone apart, often those questions are about the interviewer, not about the guest.
Let me just say, I think there are places where thatâs really appropriate, particularly in day-to-day current affairs. But in the stuff that weâre doing â if I attack a guest, what am I likely to get out of them? All heat, no light. Iâd much rather try to open somebody up by being empathetic, by actually being interested in what they have to say, and why they might have reached a certain point in their lives, and within the course of that, throw in challenging questions so itâs not assuming that this person isnât to be challenged.
I think most of my guests walk away feeling challenged by the experience, but itâs not that old fashioned adversarial way of, âright, Iâm taking a position on you and Iâm now going to go in hardâ.
Dom Romeo: After that, and as good as that is, to suddenly meet someone in the audience who is a â Iâm trying not to use the word ânobodyââ¦
ANDREW DENTON: We call them âso-called âordinaryâ Australiansâ because thatâs how theyâre viewed.
Dom Romeo: Excellent. Then you talk to âso-called âordinaryâ Australiansâ and again, Iâm astounded by their stories.
ANDREW DENTON: Yeah. And thatâs always the case. And all weâve done is put on camera what Iâve been finding for years. One of the interesting points is the lie, the commonly held belief that Australians canât talk. Iâm constantly astonished by the eloquence, let alone the honesty, with which people explain things that are very, very difficult in their lives.
When the show started and we started doing that part of the show, the response to it was very negative: âwhy are you talking to those people? Weâve never heard of them beforeâ. And by the end of last year, for many people, that was their favourite part of the show.
Dom Romeo: Early on you featured three nurses â it was an amazing interview because of the stuff that it revealed, that we â non-nurses â just wouldnât be aware of.
ANDREW DENTON: Thatâs the hardest thing to get together, because there is no starting point for those interviews. Literally, researchers have to go to the phone book, and if weâre doing truckies, we have to go to âtâ for trucks. Thereâs no registry of âtruckies ready to talk on televisionâ. They take a lot of lead time to find three people of sufficiently different experiences who are sufficiently confident to talk about their experiences on television but every time we do it, itâs very rewarding.
Dom Romeo: One of the nurses spoke of âFLKsâ â âfunny-lookinâ kidsâ. That was a challenge to the way youâd think. Of course nurses are going to have to discuss their work in that way with each other, to let off steam, to cope with the jobâ¦
ANDREW DENTON: Thatâs right. We got some complaints about that, but it doesnât mean that they donât respect those kids. In the way that we all do, we all apply humour to our workplace, but it doesnât mean that we donât do our jobs sincerely. Something you just said there â âit made me think differentlyâ â thatâs my definition of the sort of television that Iâm interested in, both as a viewer and as a practitioner of it, which is, I would like to think â though itâs not always possible â that, with Enough Rope, in any given episode, if you sit down and watch it, youâre going to walk away with one thing that made you think differently about something.
Dom Romeo: Congratulations on the Kennett interview, then! In my book, he was always a bastard! Iâd never seen a caring, human side to him, and you almost got him to reveal it, reluctant though he was.
ANDREW DENTON: Our website has lots of different opinions on the Kennett interview, ranging from he was a bastard to I was a bastard, and I think they might both be legitimate. He was tricky, and I just feltâ¦ the peculiar moment for me was where he couldnât find it within himself to say something good about his wife. I was surprised because before the interview he was funny and charming and interesting, and then he came on determined to be none of those things. And I know he was there because he wanted to push the âBeyond Blueâ cause, which is admirable, and he did it very well. But I think if you want to speak to human beings about a really deep problem, you have to be human yourself. And to deny one in order to promote the other, Iâm not sure that that works in the long run.
Dom Romeo: But he did get his message across, and you did reveal a side to him that we donât often see.
ANDREW DENTON: Again, I think that has a lot to do with time. We do take the time to have a conversation, because it takes a while for people to relax into stuff. Iâve done the other sort: Iâve done âchatâ. Thatâs one of the reasons Iâm doing this. When I was at Channel Seven, doing a show that I loved and that Iâm very proud of, I used to come away from interviewing extraordinary people for maybe ten minutes if we had a long time, and thinking âwe only just got startedâ!
Dom Romeo: You said that it takes you a while to let them settle in and theyâre longer interviews. Obviously they have to be edited in some way for television, but there are times when edits are apparent, that suggest sizeable chunks are missingâ¦ you make Sir David Attenbourgh laugh, for example, and we cut to you, we cut back to him no longer laughing and clearly a huge edit has taken placeâ¦
ANDREW DENTON: As with everything, there are always things that we could go back and do better.
Dom Romeo: Sure, but all I was going to say is, did you feel tempted to go back and reinstate bits that had to be edited out, to give us âextended versionsâ for DVD?
ANDREW DENTON: You know what? There just isnât the time, unfortunately. One of the astonishing things about this show is how âall-consumingâ it is. We just did Bill Clinton last week and I was just thinking about it the other day: in our terms, heâs already in the waste paper basket now. One of the interviews that, for years, Iâve wanted to do, and itâs just gone. Youâve got to turn around to the next thing. There wasnât time to be tempted, though it would have been nice.
Dom Romeo: How did you decide what would be released on the DVD?
ANDREW DENTON: That was the ABC. They nominated what they thought would be good, and I said ânoâ to a couple and said âyesâ to those ones.
Dom Romeo: Can you let me know what didnât make the cut?
ANDREW DENTON: Oh god, I couldnât even remember. I just thought this was the better range. I really wanted to have Fiona Stanley in, for instance, and I think that wasnât one that they originally nominated. I wanted, like the show, to have a range of guests.
Dom Romeo: I quite enjoyed the Kath & Kim interview.
ANDREW DENTON: That was an interview almost entirely for entertainment. You werenât going to get a great deal of enlightenment, but it was great fun. And the fact that they wrote the whole series as school mums â thatâs pretty damn impressive. Thereâs an enormous discipline required in writing this stuff, and the fact that they were able to do that around their parenting lives is really quite something. There it is again: parenting.
Dom Romeo: When Iâve watched an interview that didnât sit so well because I took issue with something that you didnât take issue withâ¦
ANDREW DENTON: I think there are many criticisms you can make of any given interview and I view it this way: thereâs no such thing as a right interview. Itâs just me taking a snapshot with my camera, and you donât have to like the camera angle, and you might have wanted a completely different picture or you might of wanted it from further away or closer up â but itâs just a conversation. If a criticism is made out of ignorance or out of prejudice, well Iâm happy to counter that. But if itâs an opinion â âyou should have asked thatâ â or the criticism âyou didnât even think to ask about thisâ â well, the fact of the matter is often we do think about stuff that people wished we asked about, but we decided thatâs not where we wanted to go with that interview.
Clinton is a case in point. People said to me, âwhy did you call him âMr Presidentâ? You were just fawning all over himâ. Well, the fact is thatâs what heâs known as, thatâs what ex-Presidents are addressed as â âMr presidentâ â and I could have chosen to call him âBillâ or âPrezâ, but I was only there for half an hour. Why would I put an unnecessary obstacle between me and trying to talk to him about more important stuff? Of course I addressed him by the term with which he is generally addressed. Which is a long-winded way of saying, there are many criticisms, and whatever take we decide to make on an interview may not be yours, in which case, you probably have a right to be frustrated, but as I say, itâs just a snapshot.
Dom Romeo: How do you feel about the series?
ANDREW DENTON: Really happy. In a good place, in that weâre all still working our butts off â weâre really working hard â and thatâs the best place to be: itâs going well, but youâre not thinking, âgee, this is easyâ. Every interview and every guest, weâre working to keep ourselves challenged. I know that may sound very Presbyterian or very wanky, but weâre up to show 21, weâve got 34 to do this year, and I look around the office and everyoneâs âhead down, bum upâ and I think theyâre the great times in your career, when you look back and itâs a bit of a blur, and then with some perspective you can look back and say, âgee, we did that, and that was pretty goodâ. The show is where it should be, but itâs still a battle to keep it fresh for the audience and for ourselves.
Dom Romeo: You do manage to get people to feel comfortable and be themselves. Iâm thinking of both Paul Hogan and Steve Irwin. I donât know what I was expecting from either of them, but I found myself smiling â grinning with joy â throughout both those interviews.
ANDREW DENTON: I got to say, with Hoges, that was the rarest of things: he agreed to come on and he had absolutely nothing he was trying to flog. He came on because he just enjoyed the show and he wanted to come on. He was such a pleasure to talk to. Iâd never met him. Iâd spoken to him once on the phone. Iâm nervous before every interview, so itâs not just the guest that needs to get relaxed, itâs me too. And when a guest settles into it and it becomes a good conversation â that word again â it really is fun. Sorry I keep referring to Clinton, but thatâs the most recent. I found myself ten minutes into that, in the back of my mind thinking, âthis is really cool; this is a guy I really wanted to talk toâ.
Dom Romeo: Was there any moment in that when you thought to yourself, âI know the other side to this storyâ?
ANDREW DENTON: Oh look, I reckon Iâm one of the few people in the world who has that bookend: signed books by both of them. And yes, the mischievous part of me was thinking, âI could really drop a few things hereâ. I did raise Monica in the interview, but in a really limited fashion, because I just think there are far more interesting things to talk to the former President about. But yes, I was struck by the weird shape careers can take sometimes.
I must say, the day I packed to go to LA to interview Monica Lewinsky, I remember thinking âthis could be the single weirdest moment of a career that has had some pretty weird momentsâ, because I was heading off to interview Monica Lewinsky for New Idea, and I was packing into my bag a Gold Logie because that was also the first year I was hosting the Logies. If anyone had said to me, at any point in my life that those three things would come together â âLewinsky, Logie, New Ideaâ â and me, I would have said, âwhat drugs are you on?â It was one of those moments that was so absurd, it was delightful.
Dom Romeo: Andrew, thank you, Iâve taken up half an hour of your time. Youâre a busy manâ¦
ANDREW DENTON: Thatâs okay. Now, before you go, are there any other things you want to take issue with that I can respond to or are you happy to leave it as it is?
Dom Romeo: Iâll leave it as it is; although, I am a blogger and I did feel the need to blog about the episode with Rachel Griffiths â particularly on her comments about the Free Trade agreement leading to everyone on Australian television having an American accent. She appears on Australian television in the show Six Feet Under, for which she uses an American accent.
ANDREW DENTON: You werenât the only person who made that remark. That may have been you on our website, and it was a fair call. The only thing I can say is that, in looking at Rachelâs career, I didnât really want to talk about Six Feet Under because most Australians hadnât seen it and thatâs why it was under my radar when she was talking about Free Trade. It was just not something at very front of mind. But it was a good call.
Dom Romeo: Well, thanks for letting me take it up with you; itâs not often I get to blog about something and have a reply to add to it, so I can actually be balanced, which I like to be, too.
ANDREW DENTON: Thatâs a rare quality.
Dom Romeo: One other thing. Zapruderâs Other Films [Dentonâs production company]. I love the name.
ANDREW DENTON: Thank you. Most people donât get that. Youâre one of the half dozen people anywhere in the world that have ever got that joke.
Dom Romeo: Do you want to talk about it or is it better not to explain the joke?
ANDREW DENTON: Iâm happy to talk about it. It actually comes from an idea that Iâve never actually made. Iâd like to. It was an idea for a documentary called Zapruderâs Other Films. To explain the Zapruder film â it was by Abraham Zapruder â the hand-held home movie of Kennedyâs assassination that we see every year, which was taken by the Warren Commission and referred to thereafter as âthe Zapruder Filmâ.
My concept of âZapruderâs Other Filmsâ was this mock documentary where youâre interviewing his kids, talking about his fatherâs career after this film, and how disappointing it had been for him that heâd had this one huge hit film and he went around the world trying to film other assassinations, hoping to relive the glory of the Kennedy one, and he never quite got there. Indira Ghandi was blown up an hour before he got there â the frustration of never quite being able to match the original Zapruder film.
Dom Romeo: Thatâs such a naughty idea; I like it.
ANDREW DENTON: Itâs very black. But itâs lovely to me. I remember the first time anyone ever got it. I went up to Bond University on the Gold Coast to talk about the media, and the people who organised it, afterwards were going to give me my cheque. They said, âwho will we make it out to?â and I said, âZapruderâs Other Filmsâ and both of them just stopped and said, âAw, that is soooo cool.â I thought, at last, Iâve found somebody that gets it.
Dom Romeo: Iâve got to commend you on some of Zapruderâs Other Filmsâ other filmsâ¦ like the Chaser stuff youâve produced.
ANDREW DENTON: Thank you.
Dom Romeo: I look forward to the day that I can chat to you again about some of the other comedy series being released on DVD.
ANDREW DENTON: Good. I think thatâs fairly soon.