We recently had the pleasure to interview independent director Andrew Moorman, who directed Sympathy (read our review),
 an independent production that we ourselves called, “a firecracker of a
 film that crackles and sparks with a crazy energy that feels like it 
will explode at any minute.”
Sympathy definitely rekindled our love for 
independent horror films and we were very excited to talk to Moorman 
about his film and exactly how he achieved making such an amazing film 
for such a low budget.
Independent filmmakers take note: you can learn a lot from Mr. Moorman and his filmmaking techniques…read on!
Fatally Yours: Welcome, Andrew and thanks so much for this interview opportunity! I really enjoyed your film, Sympathy! Can you tell the uninitiated a little about your film?
Andrew Moorman: Sympathy is the 
twisted claustrophobic tale of a reckless bank robber, a rebellious 
teenage hostage, and an escaped convict, who all find themselves trapped
 in a bad motel room for one long, bloody night, where nothing is what 
it seems. It’s a classic suspense thriller with elements of horror. It 
is purely independent cinema, the culmination of three years of blood, 
sweat, and tears by a tiny group of artists whose raw passion for 
telling this story, the genre, and the fans are hard to parallel. I’m 
truly glad you dug it!
FY: Where does the title of the film come from?
AM: Jesus, you hit a soft spot right off the bat. The title of this film is a story unto itself…
I once heard an assessment of titles that I really like: Titling a 
project is like naming a child, you name it when it’s born and it tends 
to just become its name, you can’t name a kid when he’s 8, it’s too 
late. Such was the case with Sympathy. The original 
title of the play was “Serendipity.” It fit, Arik (the playwright) 
obviously liked it, as that’s what he named his kid when it was born and
 he had raised it accordingly. It was and always will be “Serendipity” 
to him, and if you’ve seen the flick that title does have significant 
meaning. But, the reality is John Cusack and Kate Beckinsale came along 
in 2001 and fucked it up with a nice romantic comedy, so when I read the
 play in 2004 I immediately knew it was going to have to be called 
something else. The problem was, we could never agree on what the new 
title should be, so for the longest time I too just called it 
“Serendipity.” I think after a certain amount of time calling a spade a 
spade it becomes impossible to call it anything else.
There were at least 10 different ‘working titles’ that encompassed 
the pre-shooting scripts, the contracts, rehearsal notices, shooting 
script, even into the picture slates. Some of the one’s I can remember 
are “A Good Room to Die In,” which has a nice noir-esque or even western
 feel, and “Bad Motel” which was sort of an homage to straight to the 
point B-movie titles. I always thought it was too bad “Kiss Me Deadly” 
was taken, as that’s not only a fitting title, but a one of the all time
 greats as well.
Regardless though, Sympathy came at the peak of 
frustration when finding a title seemed impossible. Our lighting 
designer, Bruce, who is a fucking character to say the least, was the 
key member of a hilarious drunk story I was witness to about the Rolling
 Stones. To sum it up, a woman at a bar told Bruce she was such a big 
Stone’s fan she named her kid after her favorite Stone’s song. She told 
him to guess the kid’s name, sincerely, and after several minutes of 
intense thinking and repeating, “Hold on, I know this” the inebriated 
genius declared he ‘had it’ and proclaimed “Sympathy for the Devil!” I 
told that story to a slap-happy cast and crew one day and after we all 
finally stopped laughing Bruce said, “You know what, you should name 
this kid after that song.” Suddenly, I thought about what that title was
 really saying, the idea of having Sympathy for someone
 you’re not supposed to, and my god, it kinda worked. Well, because of 
the classic film by that name we knew we couldn’t go there, but when 
condensed to just “Sympathy” it fit. Ultimately to me it’s become Sympathy, it now feels unnatural to call it anything else. So Arik’s baby on stage is “Serendipity” and mine on screen is Sympathy.
To me the title of this film is about having sympathy for each of the
 three characters, which I think most do at some point in the flick. 
That’s a unique thing in that you’re usually made to feel sympathetic or
 empathetic for only the ‘good guy’ in a film, but in this tale no one 
is definitively good, they’re all liars. I thought, if we could get the 
audience to feel sympathy for everyone at some point, to care about all 
three of these characters, we will have created an environment where 
everyone and everything means something. It’s about honesty in the midst
 of this giant lie, and vulnerability. Plus I really love one-word 
titles and “sympathy” is a great word (especially when written in red).
FY: Why did you decide to make Sympathy into a film?
AM: Although originally written for the stage, this 
piece was cinematic to me from the first word. I think film and theatre 
shouldn’t differentiate what their focus is, they should both focus on 
character and story. While condensed to one room, which is common for a 
play but uncommon for a motion picture, Sympathy has 
three amazing characters that embody an amazing story; that’s the core 
of what has to be there for a film to work, and it was.
Also it being my first feature film, I was allured by the fact it was
 only three characters. I felt with that I could actually focus on each 
one, giving weight and purpose to their existence and work extremely 
intensively and meticulously with the actors. And ultimately I saw it as
 an enormous challenge for me as a director. It was never a case of, “Oh
 great, three characters/one room, this should be easy…” I knew the idea
 of keeping an audience’s attention for over 100 minutes with one 
location would be near impossible and I was also glad there were so few 
films (if any) that dealt specifically with that same problem, so I 
avoided inadvertently ripping others off. It was all a grand exercise 
that we had no clue would work or not.
FY: Between Arik Martin’s whip-smart script and your
 sharp directing, the film is suspenseful and engaging, even though all 
the action happens in one room. How did you keep the atmosphere of the 
film so tense?
AM: There’s one director out there that gets 
environment right every time out, and that’s Werner Herzog. He does it 
by avoiding a separation between the environment of the world inside the
 film, and the environment of the outside world you’re making the film 
in. You wanna shoot a guy lost in the jungle; you go to the middle of 
the jungle… So in our case the first thing I did was to be very 
selective about where our soundstage was. We all lived in the heart of 
Chicago, which houses nice hotels, but no real bad motels. When you get 
out of the city you can find some great iconic rows of fleabag inn’s, 
all of which we scouted, but the motel in Sympathy felt
 like it had to be in the middle of nowhere — the desolation had to add 
to the hopelessness of these characters. So, as luck would have it, we 
found a barn way out in the middle of nowhere and that’s where we built 
our set. It was an hour outside the city, surrounded by an endless 
cornfield and ominous woods, and we knew once we got out there there’d 
be nothing to do but make a movie.
As far as the set itself it was a four-walled set with a ceiling, so 
we were locked inside. The room quickly became every bit as dingy and 
disgusting as any motel room I’ve ever been in (sans the lovely 
comforter stains), and after shooting everyday in it for 13, 14, 15 
hours a day, it transformed into a house of complete madness. It really 
became our blood soaked heart of darkness, and we had some truly dark 
days in there, so what the camera was capturing was simply what was 
there. The isolation added to our hopelessness as well. We created that 
environment to shoot in so we wouldn’t have to fake it later. I still 
can’t imagine shooting this movie in a nice soundstage in the city, 
being able to call ‘cut’ and walk out into air conditioning, where the 
cityscape was just outside our door. It would be like Werner shooting a 
jungle on the backlot of Universal, in between the tour bus passing by 
to take pictures.
FY: What experience with filmmaking did you have before making Sympathy?
AM: I went to college in ‘99 to study acting with a 
prestigious conservatory for theatre. Once I got there my love for film 
was unmistakable and as much as I was drawn to theatre, I wanted to 
create cinema. In the midst of that program not being a good fit for me I
 started to discover what happened behind a camera to create a film, and
 for Christmas that year I got my first Canon digital camcorder. I left 
the program at the end of that year (on the advisement of one of the 
professors, who encouraged me to explore directing for film) and 
immediately started creating projects, and I just never stopped. It went
 from short films to documentaries to experimentals and video art to 
music videos and industrials. The short films started to get longer and 
longer and more complicated and I started getting hired as a commercial 
director, editor, and shooter. The year before I graduated I was working
 on an hour long short funded by the president of the university and was
 also shooting commercial spots for companies like ESPN and Weber Grill.
 I think I’ve logged well into the thousands of hours shot and god knows
 how many more cut. That’s all I did in college was work on making 
movies, it was, and still is, a true obsession. But I wanted to make 
feature films and be a narrative storyteller, so when I finally found 
the right piece I dropped everything else and went for it.
FY: The acting from the three leads in the film is 
absolutely amazing! What kind of auditioning process did you go through 
to find your actors?
AM: I agree! I’m so proud of the performances in 
this film… Dennis was the first role cast. Aaron Boucher and I did a 
play together (as actors) that was written by Arik and we became fast 
friends. During the rehearsal process for that play and performing it on
 stage every night I saw not only a consistency and raw energy in his 
performance, but a potential that wasn’t being tapped. Plus, getting to 
know him personally I had a fascination with him like Klaus Kinski to 
Herzog or Brando to Coppola.
Trip and Sara came out of a huge casting call we did in Chicago. 
Steven came in the room and I instantly knew he was actually the 
character Trip in real life when he dropped his script, fell over a 
chair, and told me his favorite movie was Big Trouble in Little China.
 He was enormously talented comedically, but could also turn on a dime 
dramatically and this kid was ready to fucking work. I knew spending 
countless days in a barn with him would be enjoyable and reliable so he 
was one of those, ‘as soon as he walked in the room’ stories. Plus he 
looks like Zack Morris and I’m a huge Saved by the Bell fan.
Sara was a big deal to me because at the time of casting she was the 
primary reason I was doing the movie. I had formed an obsession with 
that character, fallen in love with her (under her spell) essentially, 
so finding the right girl to bring that character to life I thought 
would be impossible. Arik had to consistently tell me after each girl 
left the room to curb my unreachable expectations or we’d never find an 
actress. Plus, I was coming off a bad working experience with an actress
 on the last film. Then, during the casting call I left the room to go 
the bathroom and when I walked into the hall where all the actors were 
prepping to come in and audition, I saw a girl curled up in the corner 
away from everyone else with headphones intensively studying her sides. 
She had a quite intensity that I couldn’t help but pick up on. She was 
adorable and dangerous looking at the same time and had a unique look 
from everyone else we saw. She came in the room, read once, and I 
directed her to read differently, throwing her all kinds of loops to see
 how she’d react. She reacted perfectly. So she read with Steven and 
Aaron and their chemistry instantly locked and wha-la. The biggest thing
 after that was taking both Steven and Marina out to lunch (separately) 
and describing what making this film was going to be like. This was all 
three of their screen debuts so I had to warn them what they were 
getting themselves into and make sure they’d go the distance with me. 
They were truly ready, so we went.
FY: All the actors had great chemistry onscreen. Did everyone in the cast and crew spend a lot of time together off screen?
AM: “A lot of time” is a genuine understatement. We 
became a family, it was incredible. I made Aaron and Steven ride the 
train together out from Chicago to Indiana and they did a lot of 
spending time leading up to the filming on their own. I also made them 
sleep in the same room in the house where we stayed while shooting. 
Marina I tried to isolate from the rest in the beginning, but very 
quickly we all just became trapped out there together so it was like Gilligan’s Island.
 We did everything together and it seemed we all complimented the next 
and made each other laugh and we cared a tremendous amount about each 
other.
When you go through something like the making of Sympathy
 it becomes an unspeakable and unbreakable bond. I think once we really 
slipped into madness we were the only one’s each other wanted to be 
around because we felt anyone else wouldn’t understand what we were 
going through and who we’d become. It was our own war. The chemistry on 
screen is like the environment on screen, it was really there when 
shooting so none of it had to be manufactured. And like trying to 
imagine shooting on a backlot; I can’t fathom making a film like this 
without going through what we went through together. I hear stories of 
actors showing up on the day of their shoot, having never met the other 
actor, shaking hands and rolling their takes, and then leaving. That 
seems insane to me, to manufacture a relationship on screen that doesn’t
 exist off. Lastly, what actors do can be a very vulnerable thing, when 
you ask them to strip it all away in front of a lens. When you build 
enough trust and honesty they’ll do that, but it’s a very personal thing
 to share and once you do you never forget it.
FY: How did you find your crew?
AM: Eddie Perason, my loyal right-hand-man has been 
with me since the beginning. He and I started making films together at 
the same time and became like brothers. He was the only one of the crew 
that made it through the whole shoot and I’ll never forget that because 
he had the least to gain from the whole thing and probably the most to 
go through to be out there.
Bruce was a photographer I adored as a person ‘cause the cat is like 
none other out there. We lived in the same building in Chicago a few 
years prior and had stayed in touch. While acting as a professional 
freelance still photographer he always expressed an interest in motion 
pictures, so we had ramped up to collaborating for some time. Then he 
moved out of Chicago to some weird farm house in Indiana, and as the 
fates would have it that’s where we ended up shooting Sympathy,
 and he and his wife were kind enough to offer us accommodations while 
we shot (little did they know how long it was going to take).
The rest of the shooting crew were a very small rotating group that 
just dug what we were doing and wanted to be involved. When the schedule
 ran way over they all had to get back to their day jobs and couldn’t 
afford to not get paid. They were great though when we had em’ 
(especially Jason Makman, our sound guy who would fall asleep while 
booming a scene — makes for a steady boom mic ironically).
The post sound crew started with Onna (sound designer), whom I met as
 a fluke in an LA bookstore when I heard her discussing another project.
 She and I hit it off and she ultimately hooked me up with Dave (the 
composer) and Aaron ‘Luc’ Levy (the mixer extraordinaire). These were 
three insanely talented people working on Hollywood films and 
television, getting well paid, and some how I coaxed them into doing Sympathy for free.
I can’t wait to make another film with all of them, as there are the 
only ones to this day I have found that share my level of passion. When 
you find people that love doing what they do as much as you do it’s a 
wonderful marriage.
FY: How long did it take to finish the film, from pre-production, shooting, and post-production?
AM: For a while I thought I was never going to 
divulge that information, but it’s the reality of independent 
filmmaking. We shot the film summer of 2004. It took us till the winter 
of that year to finish. Then, in the beginning of 2005 I moved to LA and
 started cutting. I had a rough cut by the fall and I smoothed that into
 something I could start to show by the end of ‘05. I met Onna and Dave 
near the end of ‘05 and we all sat down in the beginning of 2006 to 
start work. Because I couldn’t pay them and they had to work in the 
midst of day jobs (like we all did) it took almost that entire year to 
get a score and design. I then met Aaron, my savior, and we started 
mixing in December of 2006. The day after Christmas, ’06, Dolby came in 
and print mastered the film and we were on a movie screen in LA Friday 
the 13th of April, 2007. From casting to the silver screen it was almost
 three years to the day. This film was as monumental and encompassing as
 high school or college for me.
FY: The film was made for a very low budget of (I believe) $6,500. How did you achieve this?
AM: It would seem impossible to make a 105 minute 
film professionally edited, color corrected, scored, designed, and mixed
 in 5.1 Dolby Surround Sound, but not knowing the impossibilities of 
this we pulled it off. The film all takes place in one room, this 
element wasn’t created to serve the budget, rather the story, but 
fortunately it makes for a contained expense account in the production 
phase. The set was built by members of the cast and crew and some 
family, the building materials were donated. The furnishings were all 
purchased from a real motel supply store for under $250. The actors 
provided their own costumes. I already owned my own digital camera and 
editing equipment and acted as both cinematographer and editor. The 
soundstage was the barn in Indiana, behind a farmhouse that provided the
 tiny cast and crew’s accommodations during shooting. The only real 
production expenses outside of that were blood (grocery store Karo 
syrup), food and tape stock (which in the mini-DV format runs around $5 
an hour).
In post-production the film was cut for free by me, and I then lured 
the talents of the composer, sound designer, and mixer to work for 
passion (paying what I could to cover studio expenses, all of which were
 cut dramatically). Companies such as Dolby Laboratories donated their 
resources for first-time filmmakers because they believed in this film 
and its creators. No one was paid up-front for their efforts and most 
involved actually spent money to see the project come to fruition. The 
print-mastering of both the sound and video were all formatted digitally
 and the final project currently only exists on DVD, which was all done 
in-house with my MAC. The film has played theatrically in multiple 
venues, projected off a DVD, which can be purchased for under a dollar, 
and holds a high-quality compressed mpeg2 transfer and the 5.1 Dolby 
surround sound mix. With modern digital technology, solid-state formats 
(which are incredibly expensive) aren’t incredibly necessary. When the 
technology services the story, and the storytellers are willing to work 
within their confines — ingenuity, creativity, and endurance can make 
amazing substitutes for money.
FY: Do you have any advice for aspiring indie filmmakers for keeping their budgets low?
AM: Step 1: Don’t pay people (including, and 
especially yourself). This sucks, as you want to compensate people for 
their hard work, but passion and creative freedom can be amazing 
substitutes for money. The reality is, you can sit around and wait for 
funding forever. It’s always an illusion that it’s going to come, and 
even when it does it always goes away before you can get to it. Just get
 out and start shooting and you’ll attract others who want to be a part 
of it. Do feed them, though, always. People will work for free, but 
never hungry.
Step 2: Use DV. Tape stock is around $5 an hour and there are no 
development costs. From the shoot, it goes right into the computer, is 
edited, and goes onto DVD… It is cost and time efficient and technology 
is pushing it to looking better and better (and more affordable so buy, 
don’t rent cause it’s always going to take longer than you thought). It 
also leads me to the next step…
Step 3: Learn how to do everything! When you don’t know how to do 
something you have to hire someone to do it for you, and rarely will 
they do it for free. If you learn how to do it on your own and you run 
out of money (or don’t have it in the first place), it can still get 
done.
Step 4: Don’t indulge. You don’t need what ‘they’ have.
Step 5: Lastly – Guerilla Filmmaking: get in, get out… got what you needed for free.
FY: In your opinion, what is the biggest mistake independent filmmakers make?
AM: They act like Independent Filmmakers. As indy 
filmmakers we have endless creative control, and for that we sacrifice 
resources, but that doesn’t mean the resources we have shouldn’t be 
treated like the resources we wished we’d have. I treat my DV camera 
like it’s a Panavision 35mm. I spend countless hours lighting and 
setting up shots. I meticulously frame. I use filters. I only shoot 
handheld when it benefits the story. I find that part of the reason 
people always identify digital films so quickly is because they are shot
 like digital films. I shoot for the story, not for the format. Also, 
don’t abuse digital editing. Just because it is ‘non-destructive’ and 
you’re not actually cutting film, it tends to become inconsequential. 
Each cut should mean something and serve a purpose. Spend the time, it 
should take every bit as long to make your indy film as it takes to make
 a major studio release. Actually, it should take longer because they 
have myriads of professionals working and you’ll certainly be working 
with a smaller crew (if not just by yourself). Focus on story and 
character. The separation between a great independent film and a great 
studio film should only be that we look a little less polished, which 
I’ve always preferred and believe makes us more accessible. But, we 
can’t sacrifice story and character just because we’re independent of 
finances or resources, we should actually have more because we’re 
independent of restriction and interference.
And lastly, the biggest mistake independent filmmakers make is that 
they quit. The number of completed indy films compared to the number 
that collapse is astonishingly low. This is an endurance test; we must 
suffer for our art. This shouldn’t be easy, if it were anyone and 
everyone could do it.
FY: During production, can you tell us about the worst experience you had?
AM: That’s like asking Carrot Top what’s the 
unfunniest thing he ever said. There were some dark, dark days. In 
pre-production we got incredibly stalled because we couldn’t find the 
extensive funding we originally wanted (or thought we needed). In 
production, almost every member of the cast and crew quit at some point.
 It was a brutal, brutal shoot, especially when the crew started 
dropping off and we whittled down to just the actors, Eddie (our 
assistant director), and myself. Being in that one room day and night 
after day and night, it just seemed like a purgatory we were never going
 to get out of. We also went from these extremely hot days to these 
extremely ridiculously fucking cold days, with no heat or A/C.
Then, in post-production I slipped into my darkest hours, as I just 
couldn’t get the beast tamed. Cutting a film that never changes in tone 
or color palate, that is essentially one long scene and giant continuity
 cluster-fuck, is the hardest thing I can imagine editing. We all did 
this in the midst of really shitty day and night jobs too, so that 
wasn’t fun, always having to mentally step back out to make the rent.
I think for me the darkest day I can remember was in post-production.
 As bad as it got during shooting I was always sharing in the misery 
with my friends, but in post the entire thing was on my shoulders and I 
had those isolated moments at 4:30 in the morning where I’d take a break
 from my regular dusk till dawn editing sessions and sit in my bathtub 
in Hollywood, starring at the dripping faucet and saying to myself, “I 
made a disaster of a fucking movie.” I was way too close to it, I 
couldn’t step back and see it for what it was.
FY: What is your favorite memory from making the film?
AM: There sincerely are so many. When you make a 
film against all odds every victory is a life-altering event. For me I 
love fighting wars, I love hitting a wall and then figuring out how to 
either get around it or knock it down. When things run smoothly I get 
bored. I also love when it transcends this process of making a film and 
becomes something personally fulfilling, like the actors hitting moments
 then didn’t know they were capable of achieving, or pushing seasoned 
professionals to new heights, bringing them out of a creative funk and 
freeing them for the first time in a long time. I guess the one that 
sticks out the most was a night in the middle of shooting where we were 
in the midst of a 14- hour day on the tail end of an epically long 
weekend, and everyone was fighting me tooth and nail because I just 
didn’t think we were getting a scene right. I pushed and pushed the 
actors and it got so heated I walked off the set, slamming the door 
behind me. When I hit the outside of the barn I looked up and the 
biggest moon I’d ever seen greeted me, as if it were sitting in the 
backyard. The world outside the set seemed hyper-real and I realized I’d
 never cared about something intangible so much. I had truly escaped the
 world, and was living inside a movie.
FY: What influences did you draw from and what were you inspired by when making Sympathy?
AM: Cinematically there was a lot of Hitchcock in 
the early planning and pre-production. I also re-watched every Kubrick 
film prior to shooting including The Shining, which I 
showed (along with the DVD’s behind-the-scenes) to the cast. I was 
really into what Chan-Wook Park was doing at the time with the Vengeance trilogy, I thought that was groundbreaking stuff visually so I studied that along with some Miike and Asian cinema. Barton Fink
 was a big inspiration in a lot of ways, set design, pacing, and the 
genius of the Coen’s in general. I was also really into mapping out some
 of Orson Welles three-point coverage along with Kurosawa films and the 
way he frames multiple character compositions. I watched a lot of 
Westerns to see how they frame character’s holding guns and pacing 
showdowns, and some grindhouse cinema of the 70’s to capture that raw 
feel. Richard Linklater made a film called Tape I took a
 look at because of the similarities, but I think more to make sure I 
was avoiding copying it than anything else; very different film though. 
And lastly I looked at David Lynch to see how he commits to the worlds 
he creates and the intensity he can build within those worlds using 
sound as such an important aspect of the filmic experience.
Beyond that, when we started shooting I actually made it a point to 
stop watching movies, unless I needed them to reference for the cast or 
crew. I drew a lot of inspiration from the people around me, simply 
because we were all trying to accomplish the same thing, we were all in 
similar places in both our artistic and personal lives, and we are all 
really freakin’ hard workers. We pushed each other a lot, and it’s 
inspiring to see someone you like and respect and admire succeeding. It 
drives you to challenge yourself at every turn, hoping to surprise both 
them, and yourself.
FY: Do you have any film projects planned for the future?
AM: As much as I truly loathe my day job, I’ve 
turned down several paying gigs recently because they haven’t been right
 yet. Whatever’s next, I’ve got an amazing reserve of creative energy 
waiting for it and I’m really, really ready to fucking work. If I’m 
going to bring a unique voice to cinema, I’ve gotta have something 
unique to say.
I’ve got this father/son road movie that turns into a revenge tale, 
it may or may not be the next thing I do. I’m still working on it with a
 co-writer, when we finish we’ll shop it around and meanwhile I’m open 
to anything else that comes my way. I’m very intrigued by both working 
on films that I write, and working on other’s scripts. Anything I do 
though is a total commitment and basically takes over my life for 
however many years it takes to make, so it’s gotta be right.
FY: What are your plans for Sympathy now (festivals, distribution deals, etc.)?
AM: I’m doing everything I can, absolutely 
everything, to get this film out there. As of writing this I’ve sent in 
to over 10 festivals (three of which we’ve gotten into so far), written 
hundreds upon hundreds of emails to web sites and reviewers and fan 
bases and screening events to get more exposure, and hopefully build to a
 good distributor seeing the interest in the film and taking us on. I’m 
still treating Sympathy as a full-time job.
I do 
something every day that I hope will forward the film. We’ve had a few 
offers for foreign distribution, some of which have gone to the 
contractual stage, but nothing is set yet. I want this film to be done 
right, I’m not into what seems like a right of passage for first-time 
filmmakers to get screwed on their first picture and ultimately give it 
up for nothing, only to wish desperately they had it back. It’s like my 
first-born; I want its future to be special. The response has been 
remarkable, we’ve been so blessed by the fans, whom I’ve said repeatedly
 are the best in the world, of any genre. So now, I need those who can 
really get it out there to believe in the film as much as the fans have.
 We’re being patient, it took a long time to make it right, so we 
realize it’s going to take a long time to sell it right. We knew from 
the get-go as fans ourselves, that the fans and audiences would decide 
the fate of this film. If that belief holds true, I think Sympathy has a bright future.
FY: Andrew thanks so much for giving us the opportunity to interview you! We look forward to seeing what you will do next!
AM: Sincerely, thank you. As an independent 
filmmaker interest in what you do means a great deal and keeps you 
going. As an independent website and publication, thank you for what 
you’re doing with your passion for this genre, and cinema in general. I 
look forward to your future and the future of this site as well.
Sympathy’s Official Website
 

No comments:
Post a Comment