DIRECTOR WANTS NAME OFF ‘DYING’

Film directors are always their own worst critics, but Mike Hodges’ opinion of his “A Prayer for the Dying,” scheduled for release by the Samuel Goldwyn Co. next month, may be the most bluntly negative review the movie receives.

“I don’t like it; I don’t like the music; it has no tension and I don’t want my name associated with it,” Hodges said in a telephone interview from his office in London. “I have written to Goldwyn twice asking to have my name removed from it. I got no reply to either one.”

Hodges said he delivered his cut of “Prayer” to Goldwyn in March and the company, without consulting him, reedited it and completely replaced its musical score. The English director, who replaced Frank Roddam four weeks before the start of production, said he was not shown the new version until last month.

“They said it was too late to take my name off the prints and all the promotional materials,” Hodges said. “But they had shown the film to others earlier. Obviously, they just didn’t want to deal with my problems.”

Hodges decided to speak out against the movie after reading comments made by Sam Goldwyn Jr. in response to an outburst by actor Mickey Rourke during the Cannes Film Festival. Rourke, appearing at an international press conference for Barbet Schroeder’s “Barfly,” told reporters he had had little time to prepare for that film because of problems with “A Prayer for the Dying.”

Pressed for details, Rourke employed some harsh language to describe Goldwyn and accused him of trivializing the film by insisting it be turned into a “big commercial extravaganza-type thing.” The film is adapted from Jack Higgins’ novel “A Prayer for the Dying,” which explores the tension and violence in Northern Ireland.

Goldwyn acknowledged at the time that there were problems during production and that making the film had not been a happy experience, but he refused to discuss specifics. He told The Times that Rourke’s only problem was that he’s “an erratic personality” and added that “a lot of talented people are.”

Hodges said Goldwyn was quoted in a British newspaper saying, “Mickey gives what could be his best performance,” praise that Hodges said contrasted rather sharply with comments made through the production. Hodges said Goldwyn executives called Rourke’s work “listless” and suggested five weeks into production that they replace Rourke and start over.

Goldwyn and his production chief Larry Jackson were out of the country and unavailable for comment, but a spokesperson for the company said they are happy with both the finished film and Rourke’s performance. Leonie de Picciotto, Goldwyn’s vice president of publicity, read a letter that author Jack Higgins wrote to “Prayer” producer Peter Snell after seeing the final version.

In his letter, Higgins called the film an “extraordinary thriller” and said it will be a classic of its kind. He thought Rourke had perfectly captured the frustrations of a committed Irish youth trying to extricate himself from a guilt-ridden life of violence.

“It isn’t often a writer gets his work so accurately brought to the screen,” Higgins wrote.

It is likely, Hodges said, that Goldwyn and Jackson believe they “saved” Rourke’s performance through the editing and the new score. Hodges read a memo that he said had been sent from Jackson to Goldwyn last January, in which Jackson suggested ways to humanize Rourke’s character, Martin Fallon.

“They tried to use music to soften Fallon,” Hodges said. “They felt he was unpleasant and unsympathetic and that they could overcome that with music. I said, ‘If you don’t like Fallon, there is nothing you can do--with music or anything else--to make him likable.’

“I don’t think they ever understood the character. What they have done to (the movie) makes quite certain the audience will never understand him, either.”

Hodges’ main complaint about the Goldwyn version is that in attempting to soften Fallon with “syrupy” overlaid music, they have sacrificed the tension that was the film’s chief asset. He provided his most succinct review of the film in a July 17 letter that he wrote to Snell, a copy of which was obtained by The Times.

“What was a fine film when I handed it over to you . . . is now a piece of schlock,” Hodges wrote, adding the dictionary definition of the word: “ ‘A shoddy, cheaply made article,’ ‘a defective or fake article.’ ”

Hodges said he hated the script he inherited a month before production began and that he had to persuade both Bob Hoskins and Alan Bates to assume key roles because they didn’t like it either.

“That script was filled with sadistic violence that was unnecessary,” he said. “The theme of the piece is anti-violence. I took out as much of that as possible and tried to focus on the character of Fallon. I don’t know what they thought they were making, a caper film or what. It is not that.”

Hodges said he is particularly offended by the treatment he received in post-production from Goldwyn executives because he feels he pulled everyone out of a jam. The $6-million film had to go into production in four weeks because Rourke had a play-or-pay contract (he would be paid in full regardless of whether the movie was shot) and another commitment (“Barfly”) immediately behind that one.

“I reworked the script, I cast it and got the crew together and made the film on budget. They have a right to change it; I don’t argue with that. But I have a right to have my name taken off of it if I am unhappy with it, and I am.”

Rourke could have made things more difficult. His contract also gave him the right to approve the director. Hodges said Rourke approved him on the recommendation of fellow English director Nicolas Roeg, for whom Rourke had worked on a movie called “Eureka.”

Hodges, a former documentarian whose best known films in this country are “Get Carter” and “Flash Gordon,” has had other bad experiences with American distributors whom he sarcastically compared to barbers, giving films “the Ollie North haircut”--short-cropped and harmless.

“I guess it’s that old conviction that Americans want their movies as comfortable and safe as they can be made,” he said. “It is the kind of thinking that goes on in this business that I hate.”