‘Stir of Echoes’ at 25: Kevin Bacon, David Koepp Discuss the Influence of Brian De Palma and Steven Spielberg, and the Shadow of ‘The Sixth Sense’

As a film enthusiast and historian, I find it fascinating to delve into the intricate tapestry of stories that have shaped the cinematic landscape. In this instance, we are discussing “Stir of Echoes,” a chilling tale that, unfortunately, did not receive the recognition it deserved during its initial release, overshadowed by the phenomenon that was “The Sixth Sense.

Back in 1999, a highly successful movie titled “The Sixth Sense” hit the screens, telling the story of a child capable of seeing spirits. Approximately five weeks later, another movie called “Stir of Echoes” was unveiled.

Kevin Bacon recalls that it was inevitable ‘The Sixth Sense’ would become a huge success, as he, David Koepp (the writer-director), and likely our representatives, all advocated for releasing ‘Stir of Echoes’ beforehand.

Their plea fell on dead — I mean deaf — ears, and Koepp’s second directorial effort earned $23 million in theaters against the $672 million Shyamalan’s thriller eventually grossed. Yet “Stir of Echoes” was well-received by critics and went on to have a thriving afterlife on home video, where it was successful enough that Lionsgate Films, the company that purchased original distributor Artisan, created a sequel, “The Homecoming,” in 2007.

To mark the 25th anniversary of the film, a brand new 4K UHD disc loaded with fresh bonus features has been released, prompting Koepp and Bacon to discuss their contributions to its creation with EbMaster. They reminisced about the guidance Koepp received from his long-term collaborator Brian De Palma, as well as the influence Steven Spielberg‘s “Jurassic Park” films had on him. Bacon shared his initial hesitation in performing the same form of hypnosis as his character, and they collectively looked back at how Shyamalan’s “The Sixth Sense” cast a long shadow over their project. The passage of time, along with the emerging DVD market, helped them escape that shadow.

You’re a longtime fan of Richard Matheson, writer of the novel that “Stir of Echoes” is based on. What was your approach in adapting this 1958 material for 1999 audiences?

David Koepp shared his reason for creating a horror film, which was his second directorial project. His first film, “The Trigger Effect,” was an upper-middle-class drama with thriller elements, but he found it somewhat self-absorbed. He desired to focus on a specific genre and create something eerie. Additionally, he sought another voice since balancing writing and directing could become isolating. Koepp admired Richard Matheson, recalling his work on “Twilight Zone” episodes that always stood out to him as exceptional. He discovered Matheson’s book and thought it was fantastic, so he approached Richard about adapting it. The original story was set in southern California during the 1950s aircraft manufacturing boom, a time and place that Matheson was intimately familiar with, while Koepp knew little about it. The working-class, Chicago environment portrayed in the movie resonated with him, as he had spent much of his childhood visiting family there, and he felt it was an unexplored aspect.

What were the initial ideas in David’s script that drew you to Tom Witzky?

Kevin Bacon: At a certain stage of his life, he’s found that his dreams have faded away. His ambition was to pursue music as a career, but life often takes unexpected turns. Before you know it, responsibilities pile up – marriage, children, a mortgage – and the dream of becoming a musician becomes unattainable. In such situations, experimenting with drugs at social gatherings can be a way for some people to cling onto their youthful spirit. Immediately, David expressed a keenness to collaborate on this character. Additionally, having worked in Chicago before, I find myself attracted to characters who, like me, hail from bustling cities and have had to work hard without the luxury of money or power. The prospect of delving into this aspect of life in Chicago sounded intriguing to me.

How did you and Kevin collaborate on the role?

I aimed for him to be an individual who had experienced setbacks in his aspirations, perceiving himself as less exceptional than he believed. When Kevin entered the scene, we developed this concept more profoundly since music would significantly contribute to the film, and Kevin is a musician. Although his acting success arrived swiftly, he recognized the need to excel in music, an area where he might not have succeeded yet. He’s an empathetic and perceptive person. Our creative process started smoothly from the very beginning.

David, I understand you got hypnotized yourself as research.

I was eager to try hypnosis since I hadn’t experienced it before. I think it was with Ileana Douglas, and the experience wasn’t as profound as I had anticipated, but I did reach a state of extremely focused concentration. While under, he guided me into a cozy book-filled study with a burning fire and a comfortable chair. I sat down, picked up a pen, and was instructed to write something and fold the paper over. Later, he asked me to unfold the paper and read what I had written – in my thoughts, not out loud – and I had scribbled, “You’re deceiving yourself.” Over the past 25 years, I’ve been trying to decipher its meaning.

Kevin, you didn’t participate?

Bacon: In an unusual move for me, I exclaimed, “Absolutely not!” The thought of someone having control over me is unsettling to me. I’ve had negative experiences connected with it. However, as time went on, I began exploring meditation and reconsidered hypnosis as a therapeutic method. To my surprise, I found it helpful, and some people are naturally receptive to it – I happen to be one of them. Since then, self-hypnosis has become a part of my daily routine, but during the filming of that movie, I was adamantly against it, saying, “No, thank you.

After discovering that he can see the dead, Tom becomes obsessed with figuring out why he’s being haunted. How did you prepare for that escalation?

Bacon: For me, a director guides the way in terms of establishing the right tone and level of intensity throughout a film. “Maxxxine” being an exaggerated movie, [Ti West] expressed his desire for it to be bold and impactful, ensuring I wouldn’t look out of place while still encouraging us to take risks. I appreciated this approach because it aligned perfectly with the movie’s style, and it made complete sense. However, “Stir of Echoes” required a more realistic, grounded feel.

How did you decide on the visual language of the supernatural?

I enjoy creating movies that make people uncomfortable, and the key is crafting an authentic atmosphere. The more realistic it appears, the greater the unease will be. In the script, the child was written to speak to a presence. Brian De Palma, who I frequently collaborated with at the time, suggested a clever idea: “Why doesn’t he always look directly into the camera whenever he’s talking to the ghost?” Recognizing a good idea when I heard one, I took it and the rest was a joint effort between the production designer and the director of photography Fred Murphy. We focused on making every detail incredibly precise and accurate.

Were there other inspirations or influences from folks that you had worked with, be it De Palma or Steven Spielberg? I guess every filmmaker to some extent steals from Spielberg.

The situations aren’t overly complicated to recognize. Movies like “Close Encounters” share many similarities – the father character is distressed and consumed by an obsession, causing damage to their home. There’s a scene in “Poltergeist” where Craig T. Nelson arrives home to find JoBeth Williams on the floor with the child and a football helmet, allowing the child to slide across the floor while she cheers excitedly. At first, it’s entertaining, and I believe it accurately reflects human nature: when something unusual occurs, it captures our attention and excitement, making it difficult to ignore such elements in favor of just creating spooky moments or startling effects. In this regard, Spielberg’s films stand out not for their visual aspects or shots but for themes like extraordinary events affecting ordinary people. There are traces of “The Shining” in this too.

As a writer of many stories full of fantastical ideas, what’s your barometer for storytelling where you give a character a choice that may not be the most believable choice, but you know that it serves a story?

In discussing the creation of a thriller, Koepp emphasizes the importance of addressing the question: why don’t characters in such stories ever contact the police? Sometimes, they do call the police, but their intervention doesn’t help or even makes things worse. Before embarking on his first film, Koepp was advised by Bob Zemeckis to read ‘Hitchcock/Truffaut’ twice before starting any work. He also suggested standing in an airport for 12 hours as a means of training oneself to become a director, though Koepp opted against the latter. In “Stir of Echoes,” Koepp has Tom’s wife Maggie suggest they call the police, to which Tom replies that he wants to hear how it would sound beforehand, a line intended to address this question. Additionally, Koepp believes that Kevin’s character chose not to contact the authorities because he was driven by an irresistible curiosity to uncover the truth.

This film comes after you’d worked on “Jurassic Park” and “The Lost World,” which used computer-generated effects in such an inventive and groundbreaking way. What was your experience like with CGI on this film?

The computer-generated imagery (CGI) we worked on wasn’t as enjoyable or impactful as the practical solutions we discovered later. The scene where he extracts his tooth looked quite outdated, like a traditional trick makeup effect. As for the ghost’s movements, Fred and I referenced a music video we enjoyed for inspiration, and there were some peculiar movements in it. We filmed at six frames per second whenever the ghost was present, but instructed the actress to move at a quarter speed. This meant that when she walked across the room, it appeared to play back at a normal speed, but with a strange, jerky gait. Even when she was simply looking at him, there were tiny, subtle movements in her facial expressions. And since these movements were real, they seemed more convincing to the audience.

Kevin, given all of the digging Tom does and its physical challenges, how taxing was making the film?

Bacon: The film was quite tangible, in a positive sense, which I appreciated. I’m fond of practical tasks. I believe they contribute to the authenticity of a character’s emotional state. At my age, I still find myself saying, “Sign me up, coach! I’m ready!” Incidentally, I advocated for the title of the movie to be “Dig.” However, there was an intriguing incident in that scene. We were filming in the yard of a house with limited space, and there was only one small window. In an impromptu moment, I grew agitated with the digging and discarded the shovel, only to spot a bucket nearby and kick it as forcefully as possible. To my surprise, it soared up beautifully, arched, and accidentally broke the window.

You wouldn’t believe it, but: It seemed like fate wasn’t on our side. As soon as it went through the window, I was right behind the computer, hoping and praying it would continue. Praying it would enter the house, praying it would enter the house. Remarkably, it did.

In a remarkably fortunate turn of events, we found ourselves in one of those instances where everyone held their breath, trying not to spoil the magic. Eventually, David called out, “Cut!” And it felt like an exclamation, “Wow, that was wild!” To be clear, I’m not a sportsman or a kicker. In fact, I wasn’t meant to be in this situation at all. But there I was, and it was quite a moment.

David, what other unplanned moments made it into the movie?

The unexpected events happened because we had a five-year-old on the set. Zachary David Cope was a fantastic child actor, but being five made him rather unpredictable. In one scene, he’s at the top of the stairs saying, “Don’t be afraid of it, daddy,” and Kevin looks at him. When we cut back, he seems to have vanished. He actually ran behind something because his mother was nearby and he wanted to leave. However, when you remove his yell of “Mom,” it becomes an unusual moment. Working with a very young child means you always need to brace yourself, be patient, and then start filming to see what happens.

“The Sixth Sense” was released five weeks before your opening day. Given the similarities between that and “Stir of Echoes,” were you concerned that Shyamalan’s movie might’ve eaten your lunch?

Bacon: Boy, did we ever.

During our post-production phase, we first learned of them. After receiving the script, we read it and noted several resemblances such as a psychic child, among other things.>

Regarding “Stir of Echoes”, I can’t recall the specifics of the how, why, or extent, but it seems that David and I, along with our representatives, strongly urged for its release before anything else.

“We suggested, ‘If it suits you, let’s start in March. Should you prefer later months, April, May, June or July, we are flexible and ready to go anytime within that range.'”

Sometimes, authorities might advise you, saying, “Just stick to acting, it’s not your place to deal with marketing,” and so on.

They responded, “We’ve already read it. It seems to be a gentle matter. We don’t have any concerns. We plan to appear in four weeks.

Bacon: It’s clear now that “The Sixth Sense” was destined for great success. However, if our film had released first, it wouldn’t have impacted “The Sixth Sense.” The issue for us was that “The Sixth Sense” became such a sensation because audiences watched it repeatedly. This had a detrimental effect on “Stir of Echoes.” Moreover, I believe they were respectful towards Matheson and wanted to keep the title, but it’s not an easy one to remember. To this day, people still ask, “Oh, I enjoyed your movie, ‘Stirring the…’ what was it called?” So, I don’t think that decision helped much.

Was there a moment of validation for you and the film that came later?

Koepp: Yes. The ones who owned it at the time – either Artisan or after Artisan – contacted us saying they wanted to make a sequel. I replied, “I suppose you did well then.” They clarified, “No, no, no. We actually lost money. We don’t owe you anything, but we’re going to make a sequel.” It was all right with me. Perhaps it would have done better in theaters if we had released it first, I can’t say for sure. However, it has certainly had a lasting impact. It became popular on DVD and has continued to be relevant. In fact, here we are discussing it 25 years later, so I am grateful for what we achieved.

This conversation has been edited and condensed.

2024-12-11 22:19