Somewhere in the Skies - The 11th Green

Episode Date: July 13, 2020

On episode 169 of SOMEWHERE IN THE SKIES, Ryan is joined by filmmaker, Christopher Munch. They discuss Munch's latest film, The 11th Green, which stars Campbell Scott (House of Cards, Roger Dodger) as a journalist who uncovers the truth behind the mythology of President Eisenhower’s long-alleged involvement in extraterrestrial events. The Hollywood Reporter calls it “A thoughtful and compelling what-if . . . provocative and illuminating.” Rife with hidden government secrets and Matrix-like mind-benders, The 11th Green is grounded in what is widely believed to be the nuts-and-bolts core story of post-war U.S. military and government involvement with UFOs. Thought-provoking but understated, filled with sharply drawn characters, stark desert landscapes, and leaps across the space-time continuum, The 11th Green is challenging cinema that generates questions, discussion, and debate long after the credits roll. Today, Munch and Ryan discuss the carefully researched, yet highly imaginative world that Munch created for his film where larger questions are asked about exopolitics, disclosure, the suppression of technology, and navigating the maze of politics, the military industrial complex, distortion of truth, and the most important question, if we aren't alone, and we finally accept this as humanity, what comes next? Watch The 11th Green at: https://theatricalathome.com/products/the-11th-green Visit Chris Munch at: https://www.christophermunch.com/ The updated and expanded edition of Somewhere in the Skies is now available! Order now in paperback or E-book. To purchase, and to leave a rating and review, CLICK HERE Website: www.somewhereintheskies.com Patreon: www.patreon.com/somewhereskies YouTube Channel: CLICK HERE Official Store: CLICK HERE Twitter: @SomewhereSkies Instagram: @SomewhereSkiesPod Watch Mysteries Decoded for free at www.CWseed.com Episode edited by Jane Palomera Moore Opening Theme Song, "Ephemeral Reign" by Per Kiilstofte SOMEWHERE IN THE SKIES is part of the eOne podcast network. To learn more, CLICK HERE Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/somewhere-in-the-skies. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At first, I didn't think it was real. I woke up to this blinding light, and I was transported to another place. Pluto TV! Then I heard a voice. Come with me if you want to live. There were thousands of movies and shows, and they were all free.

The truth is ours. It's just so beautiful. On Pluto TV, free streaming of Terminator 2, fringe arrow, the 100 NX files may cause excitement, loss of sleep, and sudden belief in extraterrestrials. No credit cards or alien encounters necessary. Pluto TV, stream now, pay never.

Choice Hotels get you more of what you value. Comfort in. It's calling your name. Save on the stay. Oh, and free waffles are yours to claim. We'll direct at storesotails.com. What's up, guys, Ryan Sprague here, and I'm just dropping in to remind you about our Patreon campaign.

Somewhere in the Skies is always free to consume, but it's not free to create. So if you want to help the show on a monthly basis, we have tons of rewards for you in return. including shoutouts on the show and website, bonus content and episodes, and free merge. Want to be my guest or pick a topic for the show? You can do that too. So if you'd like to learn more and to help support the show, visit patreon.com slash somewhere skies. Thank you and keep looking up.

A number of aerospace and defense insiders tell us that anti-gravity planes and disks have been a reality for more than half a century. What if the real question is what should the people know? How much do they really want to know? Is this or is this not why we exist to cover what corporate media won't? Unfortunately, all the good stuff's locked away in special access programs. Born secrets, forever secrets, no mandatory declassification date. Is that ours or theirs? Well, by theirs you mean the Russians.

I don't mean the Russians. Without your discernment, without your analysis, without what I'm, I know is your commitment to honesty, and this just disappears into folklore. This is Somewhere in the Skies, and Brian's bread. Chris, thank you so much for joining me today on Somewhere in the Skies. Oh, it's a pleasure, Ryan. Thank you for having me. The pleasure is all mine, man.

I recently watched your film The 11th Green, and it blew me away, and we will definitely get to that. But before we even talk about the real reason you're here to talk about your new film, some of my listeners, they probably are familiar with one of your other films if they follow my work and the work of, you know, cryptozoologists and the paranormal and everything. And I saw that this wasn't your first dive kind of into the unknown and more esoteric topics. So I was wondering maybe if you could tell us a little about your film letters from the big man before we even get started here. Sure, sure. the feature that I made prior to this one, as you say, was called Letters from the Big Man, and it dealt with the subject of Sasquatch, but it tried to deal with it in a realistic way as a drama

where the character of the Sasquatch is not presented as a monster or some sort of threatening presence. And it dealt with a woman who was a forester and artist, and while conducting a stream survey for the Forest Service, winds up interacting with this being, who winds up being an influential figure in her life in a certain roundabout way. And, you know, I think you hit the nail on the head when you said drama. Now, for some of these topics, it can always be taken, you know, with a little smirk as it is in the mainstream media often. That seems to be changing. But you do have this line, I think, that goes throughout all your films of really touch.

on societal issues and, you know, the cultural impact these things can have. And that was very apparent in your new film, The 11th Green, as well. So I guess kind of diving into the 11th Green, where did the idea come for this film? And how familiar were you with UFOs and you had an interest in it prior? Yeah, how did this all come about? Well, I can't say that my knowledge of UFOs was extensive before I sort of very organically embarked on this thing. Neither was my knowledge of the Eisenhower presidency. But what I think interested me about this was the fact that there was this persistent folklore out there since the 1950s that on one or more occasions, Dwight Eisenhower as president, had face-to-face meetings with representatives of extraterrestrial races. And for me,

it was more about the, again, the societal aspect, and what interested me very much in exopolitics was this idea of humanity's organic readiness to assimilate the information. And why, you know, why is it taken this long, really? Because we see, you know, through all of the literature. And I had read some of the classic literature, not a great deal, but I had read like The Interrupted Journey by John Fuller. I had read a couple of books by Heinek and Valet. I had read clear intent. So I was aware of some of the history, but not very much of it. Of course, once I started writing the screenplay, you know, it involved a great deal of reading

and kind of looking at aspects of the phenomenon that didn't necessarily have a direct bearing on my storyline, but nevertheless were important for me to explore to a degree. So I think they say that, you know, it's important really to, open all of those doors, even if you don't necessarily walk through them, because they inform, you know, what it is you are writing about. So in any case, I think my desire to make the film arose less out of wanting to do sort of a definitive book about, or a definitive film about UFOs, which is impossible because it's such a vast topic. But rather, you know, this idea of an emotional what-if involving President Eisenhower and how would this man have

perhaps reflected back on events of his presidency that had involved extraterrestrials, you know, would he have had any regrets about the way things went? So, again, it was sort of kicking around for a while, and it jelled eventually to involve a second president in conversation with him and a contemporary journalist as the framing device for the story. Journalist is always a good device in that way for allowing us as an honest. audience to explore a topic that that is many-faceted and dense with information. Absolutely. And, you know, in an age where kind of everyone claims to be a journalist now,

it's good to see an actual investigative journalist out there looking for the story. You know, instead of regurgitating the same thing, we see every day, you know, once one news outlet gets a hold of something, then you just see the same thing running throughout all of them. So, yeah, in terms of that character in your story of Rudd, I'd love to maybe paint a little picture of what the overall premise of the film is, Chris, if you wouldn't mind, you know, now without giving too much away. But yeah, what is the overall idea of the 11th Green and maybe a little even about the casting of this movie? I'm very familiar with your main character. I've been a huge fan of his work for a long time. So yeah, maybe if you could just paint a little picture of what

the 11th Green is and how you went about casting it. Well, the storyline involves a journalist played by Campbell Scott, who at the time of his estranged father's death is summoned back to California to sort of deal with his father's affairs. And his father was a retired Air Force General who was very involved in classified aerospace programs. And at the time, he was a of the story, Jeremy is reporting on an aerospace company that is attempting to migrate a black world technology, as it were, into commercial aviation. And the conceit for this was loosely inspired by the suggestion that around 208 Boeing Aircraft Corporation attempted to do just that. Paul LaVuette, the writer and physicist, suggested that and has written about other

aspects of exotic technology and in connection with aerospace programs. So the idea was that at the time of Jeremy's reporting on this present-day event, he, by way of his deceased father, is all of a sudden thrust into this seemingly incredible backstory of our country's premature, you could call it that, intersection with a crashed objects and extraterrestrials in the 1950s, and incredibly is offered film that purports to describe this. And as a journalist, of course, he's very hesitant about the authenticity of it and very concerned about his reputation and very concerned about utilizing it, since it is being so freely offered to him. But I think the fact that it is coming his way is

kind of indicative of the trend that we've been seeing where there is more information out there and more even official information and acknowledgement out there, such as, you know, these videos that have been out for a while, but which came to prominence since 2017 by way of the mainstream coverage that the New York Times did and other outlets that typically in the past have not treated the subject very seriously. So in any case, Jeremy, the journalist is also friends with the man who was the current president, not our real current president, but a Barack Obama-like character who, again, was his boyhood friend. So there are all sorts of complications that arise concerning whether the technology that this company is attempting to migrate will be declassified

and whether that can proceed or, you know, what would happen if, you know, if the military or government decided that it couldn't, you know, couldn't be made public. And, you know, how would that work on a, on a criminal level? So there were a lot of opportunities to look at some of the issues surrounding UFO secrecy, such as the over-classification of documents and just this long history of using this reality, the empirical reality of UFOs as a kind of psychological operation almost or exploiting it for purposes of the national security state and exploiting it for purposes of private gain in the aerospace sector.

I mean, there is, you know, throughout the 70-plus years of, you know, quote-unquote, the UFO issue, I guess, there has always been this psychological warfare aspect to it. I mean, we know for a fact that other countries, Russia in particular, were digging into UFO researchers and sending people to try to find stuff out at these things. So, you know, a lot of UFO researchers wish that were the case for them. You know, their work is that important that they would have these Russian assets trying to get information from them. But we've seen that this is this is the case, you know. They have possibly tried to create false narratives on what UFOs are or aren't to either destabilize a certain nation, this, that. I mean, we could go down a whole rabbit hole of conspiracy theory with that, but kind of tying it back to what you're saying, Chris.

There's these moments in the film that I really liked where you, You represent UFO videos. We mentioned these current ones, the Tick-Tac UFOs, the Gimble, the Go Fest and everything. But you go back in time to these sort of more 50s and 60s era, Cold War era, videos. And I was wondering, could you tell us a little about who worked on your effects and how you conceived your UFOs for the movie? I mean, there were some videos that caught my attention where I'm like, I feel like I've seen this before. And of course, they're your spin on them. But yeah, what was your idea for how to cover the UFO videos that our character Rudd comes across in the film?

Well, let's see. We created footage, but we also knew that we would have a straightforward archival material that was a part of these discursive meetings between two presidents. So I, you know, sought out material that would illustrate some of the points being discussed. For instance, there's a point at which Eisenhower is talking about how you had men, good men, having reactions within themselves that they couldn't control and they couldn't even begin to understand. And we see at that point a couple of people who figure prominently in the lore of people like Gordon Gray and Venever Bush and Hoyt Vandenberg and some of those individuals who, again, had, I believe, grave concerns having lived through the same. Second World War and indeed the War of the Worlds, which came out in 1938. But in terms of how we depicted UFOs, it was a decidedly lo-fi approach to it.

And the fellow who worked on this with me, Ethan Fox, I think, did a good job. I think a lot of people have been critical of the way, you know, the objects are so lo-fi. But, again, we didn't really want to delve into, you know, making a modern sort of effects picture where there's, a lot of visual splash, I suppose, associated with the objects. And certainly in the case of the historical UFOs, like the one that's at White Sands, you know, the intention was to attempt to integrate it as seamlessly as possible. And then we have a couple of more contemporary ones. So the short answer to your question is it was a lo-fi approach to depicting the UFOs.

It makes perfect sense. I mean, again, we're looking at, you know, quote-unquote historical or archival footage. So, no, I think it worked really well. I mean, one of them gave me chills. And, again, not giving away too much to the audience, you know, this idea that these UFOs could or could not possibly be influencing our weaponry, you know. And we can get to that in a little bit, the kind of more overarching question of alien and human interaction. but Eisenhower. Now, this is a big focus of the film,

and you did mention different world leaders meeting in your film. And, of course, Eisenhower has played a huge role in UFO lore. He's a major player in your story, and so was a Obama-like representation. So why did you decide having these two former presidents meet up in the film, and maybe if you could describe a little of your approach to how they meet, in this story. This, this, this, this, this, this blew my mind, man. I'm not going to lie. I loved it. Oh, well, I'm glad it worked for you. You know, the idea was that we have this contemporary Obama-like

president at a time when he really needs more clarity on this particular subject, which he has had limited access to. And he, well, in a literal sense, he uses a certain meditation protocol involving a recording to go into this sort of altered state of consciousness in which he encounters Eisenhower in this kind of, you can call it a dreamscape if you want, or some in-between, out-of-time place. And again, during these discursive conversations between the two men, he gains a deeper understanding and also gains Eisenhower's seemingly after-death perspective on how the events have progressed since then and what might be an optimal approach for him to take.

And, you know, as far as why these particular guys were chosen, well, again, Eisenhower figures prominently in the lore. And Obama, again, seemed like a man of such intellectual, you know, curiosity as to be a really good foil for him. And, of course, the way in which I depicted them, I think undoubtedly was informed. by my admiration, you know, my deep admiration for both of them in different ways, despite, you know, grave misgivings about certain policies that each of them took. I mean, with Eisenhower, it's very obvious now that, you know,

some of the covert actions that he embraced so readily in the 1950s were really misguided and that we are, in fact, living with the very negative consequences of those actions now. You know, Obama were still a little bit too close to his presidency, really, but there's certainly are a number of areas in which he dealt with national security matters and targeted killing and so forth where it would not be inappropriate to have

misgivings, I think. But in any case, the topic of this film was the UFOs and the extraterrestrial presence. And it was intended to be really an apolitical movie since the subject of

UFOs is inherently a political. As we've seen, by the various television appearances and suggestions of recent presidents, including our current president very recently talking about this subject. So there is a long history of our fascination with presidents and presidential exopolitics. And this is something that Grant Cameron, certainly over the years, has written about very thoroughly and in a very in-depth sort of way. So I think there's certainly something about inherent in the American presidency that is fascinating to us, since it represents a projection of all of our highest values and ideals and when it sort of falls short of that or when we feel like information maybe is being withheld from us for whatever reason. You know, we sometimes have an emotional reaction.

And in Eisenhower's case, you know, he certainly accepted that large parts of his work had to be done, you know, out of view of the public. But I never doubted his, who he was working for. I never doubted that he was a servant of the people. He was, you know, of course, a national hero having, you know, led the Allied expeditionary forces in Europe during the Second World War. He was supreme Allied commander. After the war, he was the first head of NATO. He was president of Columbia University, and he was the American president for two terms. And he shepherded America through a very dangerous period, which I think from an historical perspective now often seems like it was more idyllic than it was or more stable than it was, probably because of the economic prosperity that America enjoyed during that time period.

But the reality is it was extremely dangerous due to all of this testing of thermonuclear development. devices, you know, which of course segues into your earlier point about the presence of UFOs at nuclear storage facilities and the demonstration over and over again very unequivocally that they can disable these devices. You know, and Eisenhower in the film legitimately asks the question, well, if they can disable the devices, what is to keep people from fearing that they're going to fire one as well? Yeah. So, and that particular area, you know, UFOs and nukes, as it were, is, it's been some really authoritative good work done by people like Robert Hastings, who, who published a book by that title.

And it's an excellent documentary as well that he participated in with Bob Salas, also extremely well researched. And prior to that, Fawcett and Greenwood's classic book, Clear Intent, you know, uncovered a lot of, a lot of, a lot of, of official documentation involving these incidents, which were very unsettling for the people who were involved in them. As the Krispy Chicken Sandwich from 7-Eleven, people always call me loud. And I'm like, yeah, I know. I'm crispy. Did you expect me to whisper?

If you want quiet, go eat some soup and reflect. Like, I know I'm a handful. I'm bold. I'm juicy. Throw some pickles and barbecue sauce on me, and baby, I'm a whole meal. And with seven rewards, I'm just $4. Quiet? No.

Krispy, saucy, and $4? Very. Only at 711. Valley through 62326, participating stores only while supplies last the app for full terms. Absolutely. I mean, the fact that they could, like you said, with a flip of a switch either way, control our most powerful weapons on the planet,

is a little, you know, a little concerning. Even if their intentions are good, we always come back to the question, like, are we the threat, you know, in dealing with these, possible others. We hear so much right now of these Navy pilots and, you know, not so worried about these unknown aerial phenomena being a threat to them, but our reaction to them could be the possible threat. So it's, you know, yeah, it's so are we the problem? And, you know, we'll

ask those heavy questions in a moment here, Chris, but I do want to move back to a more technical question, if you don't mind. The title, 11th Green, the home of Eisenhower, and later in life, the home of Jeremy Rudd, your character, your protagonist, his father, both lived in the same home, and it was stunning to look at. So I have to ask, how did you find this home? Where was it located? Yeah, give us the history on that, if you don't mind. Well, thank you. Yeah, no, we were very fortunate in that sense. My original hope, of course, was to build the house on a stage, you know, and since a good chunk of the movie took place there,

and I had visited Eisenhower's actual house, which the current owners were extremely kind to let me see and photograph and so forth. But at a certain point, it was clear that I would be working at such a low budget. It would be impossible to build it on a set, so I needed to find a location. And in that connection, you know, we, because we were such a small crew,

just a small handful of people. We actually did look on location a lot in Palm Desert and Palm Springs, California. And there were a couple of historic houses that were possibilities, but not really very practical owing to the fact, firstly that they were situated in these very exclusive golf clubs, but also in the case of one of them at least, it was furnished with period furniture. And the wear and tear factor would have been really bad for it.

So it didn't work out for us to shoot there. However, our production designer, Jennifer Gentile, and our producer Valeria Lopez, had both, as had I, we had all seen a post that had occurred, that it appeared in the architectural blog, L.A. Curbed, about a house in La Cagnada that was very historic. It was built around 1958, and it was similar to the case study houses

in the sense that a lot of manufacturers saw it as a show place for their products, whether they be built-in appliances or cabinetry or carpeting or what have you. And this house had just been sold, and it was in escrow at the time we were looking and unavailable. But the day that it closed escrow, Jennifer, the production designer, got in touch with the owner and found out if it would be possible for, them to delay the renovation work that they were planning to start on the house. So it just worked out very fortuitously for us that we could do anything we needed to do with the house. And, you know, it was convenient and not in the desert.

And fortunately, it had only been owned by one family since it had been built. So it was a virtual time capsule, and many of the actual furniture and dressing was from the house itself. that we made use of. So I'm just extremely happy. And every time I see, every time I see the film and see the character of the house itself, it brought so much to the movie in that sense. I couldn't be more pleased with it. And of course, Sarah Garth, our cinematographer, did a wonderful job photographing it and using different techniques for the different eras that are depicted there, hopefully to distinguish them from each other. That's awesome. I love hearing, you know, the inside story on how these things come to be in terms of like just by happenstance or the timing is perfect. And you're

right. I mean, it was stunning to look at. And I'm watching it. I'm like, wow, that's where the budget went for this thing. But in reality, like you said, it was like a virtual time capsule. It just added such a flavor and style to the movie. So no, that was awesome. A character of its own, I would say. Yes. And it was a big budget item, but it was such an important. location we needed to we needed to spend the money yeah well well worth it um well moving back to uh i guess the the bigger questions in the film chris you have this this thing you call the backroom boys i love this term and um so would you mind maybe giving us a little idea of what these backroom boys represent in the overall narrative of your film yes i mean the film uh subscribes or

to the hypothesis or it postulates that there was a post-war special group that was created specifically to deal with the UFO phenomenon, with the crashed objects, with the presumed extraterrestrial presence. And this organization, again, allegedly usurped other branches of the government. Not that it was a branch of the government. It was always, I think, created to be autonomous. from the government so that the government itself could maintain plausible deniability with respect to everything that was going on. But there was a real need for the special studies group.

And there was all sorts of, I think there were all sorts of turf wars that went on, you know, during that, during that era, particularly with regard to signals intelligence. You know, NSA, which was the successor to the Army's signal security, I think felt that it should have, you know, authority for all of that. And very interestingly, some of this is described by Admiral McConnell in his confirmation hearing, his Senate confirmation hearing, he talks about some of these turf wars. And again, NSA's struggle to maintain dominance, I guess they would say, over signals intelligence. But the group itself, you know, various names have been suggested as having been members of the group. Whitley Streber wrote a very good novel

about this alleged organization called Majestic, which I think kind of gets it basically right. So you had, again, as Eisenhower's head, men with grave concerns about this. Some of them, like Admiral Hillen Ketter, returned to active duty after his service in the alleged organization and after his service as first director of CIA.

And indeed was, you know, a board member of NYCAP, was a good friend of the writer Donald Kehoe, who wrote some of the most important books of the 50s that sort of gives us the blow-by-blow account of this. And interestingly, going back to what we were talking about earlier, about UFOs and nukes, Hillingheader himself, in the early 1960s, stated publicly his concern, which echoed the concern of many military men,

that the misidentification of a UFO as some sort of Soviet threat could lead to disaster. and the starting of a war. So he was a proponent of open research on the subject later on. But in any case, it does seem that the post-war group was an outgrowth or made extensive use of the apparatus that was in place for the atomic bomb project that was an outgrowth of OSRD, the Office of Scientific Research and Development, which Venever Bush headed. He describes in his late memoir pieces of the action in great detail the way in which he went around Congress and went around the military to President Roosevelt directly to establish the organization, which provided a number of important technological tools to this country immediately before and during the war, and of course oversaw the building of the bomb. So the national laboratories existed, and within the national laboratories after the war, these phenomena could be studied and so forth. So, you know, I think, again, this is speculation, but it kind of conforms to what is commonly accepted.

The American president, Harry Truman, had a greater degree of involvement at that time, given that the group had been formed after the war and during his presidency. and in subsequent presidencies, you know, the organization became presumably more and more compartmentalized, less accurate information was shared. In fact, there's a deleted scene from the film, which is a good scene. I really like it, but it uses as its point of departure the folklore that at a certain point, the organization was in Albuquerque and defying Eisenhower, refueling. to report back to him. And he, in turn, threatened to, threaten to very publicly compel them, you know, to do so. And in the film, or sorry, in the deleted scene from the film, he meets with Robert Cutler, Bobby Cutler, his national security advisor, and imposes on him

to go out to Albuquerque and let them know in no uncertain terms that he'll have them brought back bodily if they don't do so. And so in this sense, I think there were aspects of that that have an historical basis during Eisenhower's presidency, for sure. But we've been told that the clandestine organization continued to exist and evolve. And I don't have any reason not to think that that is the case if we consider, you know, in the modern day, whatever it has evolved into, some sort of senior inter-earned. agency intelligence group, if we consider the way in which public events, public close-encounter events, are very carefully controlled, where representatives of whatever this control group is seem to appear on the site and usurp local law enforcement, certainly, and in some cases the military.

But an even more documented way in which to think of this is to compare, say, the alleged Roswell incidents with the ones that followed simply a couple of years later. at Aztec, New Mexico, and compare the swiftness and efficiency with which the Aztec events unfolded and were secretized compared to the messiness of how the alleged Roswell events were handled and secretized. Yeah, learning from their mistakes, I guess. It would be a good way to put it. Exactly.

Yeah, exactly. Hey, guys, Ryan here. And I'm just dropping in to tell you all about a podcast I received. recently discovered that has me binging their entire back catalog. It's that fun, that good, and right up my alley. As I know, it most likely will be for you as well. Guide to the Unknown is a podcast about horror. Every week, sibling hosts Kristen Anderson and Will Rogers discuss spooky pop culture, urban legends, and the paranormal, while keeping it cozy and fun. Some of my favorite episodes include a tour of the unique Disney haunted mansions around the world,

the account of a seance they attended in a paranormal bookstore, and the real-life story behind one of my all-time favorite movies, The Contry. They've covered Stonehenge, crop circles, men in black, Bigfoot, and even techno ghosts. Yes, you heard that right. And you'll hear a new episode every Friday, and all major podcasts. apps, including Apple Podcasts and Spotify. I also have to mention that one of their most recent episodes covered the Al-A-Gash alien abduction incident, and they bring us up to speed with this highly controversial case. So grab your Afghan Temple Ball and give that episode to listen. Don't know

what Afghan Temple Ball is. You will after listening. So head on over to www. gtttutod.com social media links and to enjoy guide to the unknown podcast. Well, okay, so we did mention Majestic 12, and without getting too speculative, Chris, one of those possible members some people have said was James Forrestall. And my mentor and colleague, Peter Robbins, he's a big, you know, proponent of not so much the UFO angle of James Forrestall, but his life and his colleague, he's. career and yes, his connections to the UFO issue. So for those who may not be familiar, could you maybe give us a little idea of who Forrestall was and why you used him in the film

and you even dedicated the film to him, which I thought was very powerful. So yeah, maybe if you could run us through who Forrestall was and how he plays into your narrative. Well, yes, I mean, Forrestall was for me a very important entry point into this material. He was, you know, an investment banker who was extremely successful in the 20s and 30s. He was, you know, he worked for Dylan Reed and Clarence Dillon, you know, the father of Doug Dillon, later John Kennedy's Secretary of the Treasury. And when war broke out, I mean, he devoted himself to public service. He became eventually Secretary of the Navy.

Well, I've heard Eisenhower's dictation of one of his. his memoirs discussing the way in which Forrestall confided in him that he was broke. I mean, he had been through his fortune. And this was a guy who was fantastically wealthy. I mean, he lived in the style of Jay Gatsby and indeed in the same, you know, in the same neck of the woods on Long Island. And but he became, as I say, a very dedicated public servant. And the most wonderful biography of him is Townsend Hoops and Douglas Brinkley's book. driven Patriot, which is a fantastically good biography.

But there are other sources that have more of a bearing on his later decline. He had a psychological decline overseeing the unification of the armed services after the war into the Department of Defense. It was a real struggle for him, you know, and Navy was probably the most obstinate branch of the service in seating. its authority, you know, to this larger Department of Defense. So, you know, he, it was very difficult for him. Very, very difficult. And at a certain point, he was replaced. You know, President Truman felt that Lewis Johnson would do the job better.

And, of course, Johnson was a man of nowhere near the skill. dedication of Forrestal, or I should say he probably was more self-serving than he was. But in any case, Forrestle is reputed to have been one of the people who recognize the necessity of their being a special group, a majestic type organization after the war. And so I think that, again, this is speculative to a degree, but I think that he was a proponent of gradual acclimatization and the gradual revelation of the information to the public, you know, by small degrees. Not necessarily all at once, certainly. But I think that as he saw various factions, various private factions, you know, struggling to benefit from the secretization of the information and whatever artifacts, you know,

were being examined at that time. I think he felt the need to accelerate even his own plans and the necessity to try and bring out some of the information through his congressional contacts. So, you know, again, the official story is full of mystery. It's one of those historical events that has so much ambiguity to it that it's going to keep people guessing for a long time. But you can read the Wilkuts report, which was the official inquest, which was unavailable for a long time. The Navy had kept it out of the public eye, but it became available in the early 2000s due to a diligent researcher, obtaining it by FOIA request. And you can view it at the Sealy Mud Library. You know, in Princeton online, you can view it.

Forrestall was, of course, a Princeton alumnus. So that, let's see, very much he, for me, is kind of emotionally at the center of what went wrong in the way in which we handled these events. Yeah. Yeah, I think to the way you handle it in your film, the event that would ultimately lead to the end of his life, it's extremely powerful and well done by the performer who played Forrestalt. in your film. It gave me chills watching that scene, so I won't give it away to the audience. But yeah, kudos to the actor who played for us. Well, Ian Hart, yeah, Ian Hart is one of the great British actors, and I had had the pleasure of working with him at the very beginning of his career on my first feature, The Hours and Times,

and then almost 30 years to the day after we made that picture, he came out to Los Angeles to shoot his scenes for me for the 11th Green. So even though Forrest Alde, doesn't have a lot of screen time in the movie, Ian does a really intense, evocative job of depicting him. So, you know, and I should point out, I mean, there were many other reasons why Forrestal was controversial and why people found him inconvenient to be around at that point. You know, perhaps chief among those was his opposition to, you know, the partition of Palestine. and he had that position not because of any anti-Semitism on his part, but knowing that it was going to be the quagmire into the future that it has been. And there were other reasons why he was no longer, you know, useful, I guess.

Yeah, I mean, he is an enigma in himself. And I think his impact is still, you know, evolving in terms of, a lot of where our country has led. And in terms of sort of moving to, I guess, technology, Chris, your film deals with the major struggle of disclosing the reality of anti-gravitic and possibly alien technology to the world in terms of your character Rudd. And I'd love to get your thoughts on this. Do you think, you know, since 2017, the, you know, Secret Pentagon program we learned about

this to the stars of... Academy working with the Navy, the Army, this even up to this Senate Intelligence Committee thing we're hearing about now with a possible UFO task force. I mean, I guess my question would be, do you think that we're moving closer to any type of disclosure when it comes to technology that could ultimately change the world? Yes, yes. But as far as any sort of truth and reconciliation, with the past and the grave sort of illegality that has taken place in the past. I don't necessarily see that coming, and I don't think it's really healthy for us to sort of focus on a desire for that.

But I do see in the future that some of the breakthrough energy and propulsion technology will finally be meeting, intersecting our world that is ready for it, whereas I think in the past, in those isolated incidents where, Maverick inventors and visionary inventors have created these exotic technologies that were suppressed. There was not the readiness at the time. They just couldn't happen. We as a society were not ready for them, although probably we'd be a lot better off if we had been in terms of the environmental degradation that has occurred over the past century. But yes, now is the time for these things not to be held back.

And I have no doubt that there are factions that are so entrenched that they will continue to guard them, you know, tooth and nail. I think it was Ben Rich, the former head of Lockheed Skunk Works, who said that these exotic technologies absolutely exist. But they're so deeply buried in special access programs that it would take. I forget what he said exactly. I think he said an act of God to migrate them into the open-stretched. science and that therefore it is better to reinvent them in the open science. And so obviously that's not efficient. But anybody who has worked in the highly secret programs that are so highly compartmentalized will testify to the fact that they're not efficient either since there's not an

open exchange of information between people who are working on different pieces of the puzzle. You know, I mean, during the Second World War, General Groves famously wanted to enlist all of the scientists at Los Alamos and to maintain a strict compartmentalization between the different divisions. And there was a rebellion against that, chiefly by Robert Oppenheimer, who headed the project. And they never would have accepted it. But now, of course, you have people who work within these deeply black programs, as has been attest, to by various informants who have very little knowledge of other parts outside of their highly specific function within the big picture. So, again, to make a long story short, I do hope that we now live in a time when all of the

brilliant people working in the open science and who have had at least a knowledge of or exposure to exotic breakthrough energy and propulsion technology, will be able to utilize that in a constructive commercial way. And yeah. Yeah. And, you know, I mean, your characters in the film, such as Forrestall, Eisenhower, even, I mean, they do stress, like, these secrets can't last forever. And I think that's a very important thing to keep in mind is the suppression of the information,

whether it's technologically driven or even possibly extraterrestrial driven, it can't last forever. And I think that's what gives a lot of people hope out there, whether it's in the UFO field or any field, I guess, this idea that, yeah, there probably are these cladins and groups working together and the back room boys and stuff like that. But it just can't, you know, it can't last forever. And some of those people who also, I guess, tried to get that information that was suppressed, came to the form of Dr. Eric Davis.

Now, I've heard you talk about Eric Davis in previous interviews as well, and he's kind of a hot topic right now in the UFO field, as it were. So have you been following all of this story of the Wilson docs and all of this stuff, Chris, and anything you want to talk about in terms of that and the questions you ask in your film? Well, I'm, you know, I'm very pleased that Eric Wilson's, sorry, Eric Davis's notes on his discussion with Admiral Wilson have come to light, even though, again, they've been circulated among certain researchers for a number of years. The fact that they are being talked about is a really important thing, and I do find them credible. And I do find the way in which Admiral Wilson was allegedly treated by the contractor who was running this special access program to be very credible. And you can well imagine, you know, you can well imagine other officials, even presidents who have been treated in a similar shoddy way by being denied access to the information. You know, I would hope that it is safer now for people in Congress to talk about this and to demand accountability. I mean, on the one hand, we have the ISCAP, the Interagency Security Classifications, Classification Appeals panel, which I think actually came about during the Obama years.

But its reach is limited. and, you know, I think that it is limited in terms of reaching into the carved-out sections of certain special access programs. Eric Davis's notes point out a particular incident that had occurred in which congressional oversight was coming too close to their sap and the deals that were apparently struck to keep that never happening again. So we can only hope that with new blood in the Congress, they won't accept those limitations. And certainly on a fiscal level, they'll be a demand for more accountability. But again, I think so much of this really has to do with the evolution in society, in the largest sense, the willingness to accept not only the reality of UFOs, but the idea that we have had to, contact with extraterrestrial races. It really has to do with humanity's organic readiness

more so than with any active suppression, which indeed has taken place over decades. But it's more to do with our readiness. And so for that reason, I think that all of these revelations are extremely important in allowing individuals to feel more comfortable talking about the subject and questioning the lies that we've been spoon fed for so many years, the distortions that we've been fed ever since, well, the Robertson panel and before then in the 1950s. We really need to own up to this and accept responsibility for it. Our president in the film, our Obama character says, you know, do you want the people to feel like they're part of some creative evolutionary process, you know, as opposed to feeling jerked around by, like

puppets on a string by a conspiracy of bankers or blue bloods or the media or whatever. So, and an important part of this is the media's willingness to step up to the plate and, and cover the topic in something other than the giggle factor, you know, anybody familiar with Terry Hansen's book, The Missing Times, knows that there's a long history of the media. covering this in a very distorted way. Absolutely. Often being a pawn wittingly or unwittingly

in spreading disinformation. Right. And I know we've even had things like I believe it was Project Mockingbird, if I'm not mistaken, where like even the CIA and whatnot were telling journalists what to write about. And I mean, that right there is just a sign

of how far the intelligence communities might be willing to go to suppress that information or to keep that stigma alive. And I think you're right. I think now more than ever, we are inching towards some sort of shift. And at 2020, the possibilities are endless, as we have seen, Chris. So I mean, maybe this will be the time. And, you know, we have another election coming up very, very soon. So could this be a tide turning in terms of the UFO issue? I don't know. But I love that. that question that you have your Obama character kind of jab back at Eisenhower with, because

Eisenhower's initial question is, how do we humanity get through this with our power intact? And I think you're right. I think it really depends on how we deal with that information if it was given to us. That's been the biggest hypothetical since day one when it comes to that word disclosure. You know, how will the world change? How will it? It affect everything, yeah. Yeah, absolutely. And so much of it depends as well on the way in which we conceive of our government, you know, rather than conceiving of the government as something that rules us or rules over us, you know, when do we start conceiving of it as something that serves us, you know,

and how can it serve us optimally as individuals, as people, as opposed to serving special interests. I do think that we are entering a new era. And certainly I don't think that the IC is necessarily working against this. I think that the factions working against so-called disclosure are very small indeed. I mean, very small and very entrenched. But I think for the most part, there is a wait-and-see attitude and very much an awareness of our readiness. And certainly we see that, I think, in these seeming trial balloons. that American presidents have floated by way of their television appearances, their late-night talk shows, one of which is dramatized in the film.

Yeah. You know, being asked by Jimmy Kimmel about this. And I think those shed a lot of light on the idea that our leaders do have a finger on the pulse of our readiness to deal with this topic. even our current president appeared recently in a Father's Day interview with his son, and in my opinion probably went further in that particular trial balloon, if you want to call it that, than the other people have gone even in the past. Yeah, it was interesting. You know, when our current president was first elected, like it was not a topic he wanted to touch. He had no interest in it.

He didn't personal beliefs kept him from looking into it. And now we see towards the end of his first presidency. We won't get into politics, but a sort of willingness to be more open to the topic, I found very fascinating. Maybe he does know more than he's letting on. And we do know that probably certain presidents were led into more information than others. I would assume Bush at some point, you know, Truman obviously and this, that, but it is an interesting question. And moving back to the public for a minute, and I guess more of within the euphology circles, this niche community, as it were, there's kind of two camps, Chris, and I'm sure you've come across this, as I have in your research. there's a very nuts and bolts scientific approach to a physical, tangible phenomenon.

And then there's this whole idea of consciousness aspect to it all, a more metaphysical or interdimensional approach. And in your film, you kind of tackle both of these elements in an elegance I've not really seen done before in any film or television show. And I was wondering, do you think we should as a community, whether it's just ephology or people interested in this topic, should we be focusing on one or the other when it comes to this? Or should we be tackling this mystery from all ends?

What do you think, personally? Lots of places can expose you to identity theft. Oh, no. That's why LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats to your identity, which is way more than anyone can do on their own. If we find anything suspicious, like new loans or changes to your financial accounts,

we alert you right away, all through text, phone, email or the LifeLock app. Get the alerts that could make all the difference. Save up to 40% your first year at LifeLock.com slash special offer. Terms apply. I think we should look at it from all ends, but I also know that the circus of phenomena, if you want to call it that, of physiological phenomena and evidence can be kind of a bottomless pit, you know. So I really think that we need to, we really need to ask ourselves, you know, what does this mean on a level of consciousness and on a level of personal growth?

And what does our presumed connection to various extraterrestrial races throughout our history mean to us and to our sense of identity and to our religions and other institutions? I mean, there are big questions that I think need to be examined much more than, you know, artifacts need to be examined and speculation about artifacts. Even though all of that is interesting and important, you know, the physical traces that are left during landings and close encounter events, the ejecta that we've analyzed or we that have been analyzed and written about by people like Jacques Valet who, himself is certainly very much a proponent of the idea of these visitors being interdimensional in some nature or being from a realm of consciousness rather than physiological beings who traveled zillions of miles to get here in metallic objects. So it is very important to consider on a very deeply personal level what this means to us and to quell, you know, and and address any elements of shadow that are inside us personally, individually, that are related

to this projection that we have of the other or this projection of extraterrestrial visitors. You know, how does that relate to our shadow? And, you know, by looking and examining deeply our own shadows, you know, can we let go of any fear that we might have of encountering the other and acknowledging our connection to the other? And indeed, if you want to talk about truth and reconciliation, acknowledging our connection and responsibility on some level for all of the sequestration of the information and cover-up and the illegality and terrible deeds that were associated with that in the past. It really is a mirror reflecting back on us, this entire topic. And, you know, I started as a young UFO researcher just looking at the nuts and bolts and real life. as the years went on and after interviewing hundreds and hundreds of witnesses or claimed

close encounter experiencers or even abductees, you know, I have kind of gone down that road of this says so much more about us than it ever will the phenomena. So I'm so glad to see that that was kind of the overall idea of your film is what does this mean as human beings? And And I'm sure this kind of size into your last answer, but what do you hope viewers will take away from the 11th Green? You know, I hope that they would have fun with the film, first of all, and enjoy the film. But I also would hope that they maybe use it as an excuse to examine some of their preconceptions about UFOs or extraterrestrial visitors or the Eisenhower presidency or the American Century or. the growth of the military industrial complex. I would hope that it would just inspire some of those discussions

and even look at the institutions that are depicted, chiefly the institution of the American presidency, the way in which it's depicted in the way in which we think about our leaders and what we want them to be, who we want them to be for us. Yeah, that's a really, really good way to sort of, I think, cap off the 11th green here, Chris. But I got to ask you as a filmmaker, and I'm sure it's hard to get this question after just having released a film. I know when my book first came out, the next day people ask me, you know, what's next? What do you doing next? Like, I just spent two

years on this book, you know. So what comes next for you as a filmmaker? Anything you can share with us that you're working on? You know, I'm looking at a couple of things. I am not very far along with either of them. One of them is tangentially related to the subject of visitation, and it's also an historical film. So, you know,

I'm in the position where the pictures that I make do tend to be very personal, and they do tend to follow my interests in that way, and I really can't put a finger on what it is that causes me to want to do a film, but I do know that

once I commit to it, it's a very deep commitment. And, you know, typically these things take me a number of years to do. The 11th Green took seven years, you know, to make. I'm excited going forward. Interestingly, I, you know, I feel like the work that I've been doing since Letters from the Big Man really is, well, I should say that I regard everything before that as having been kind of apprentice work for me, which I love and, you know, which I appreciate in hindsight. But I think that what I'm doing now, interest me more than any of that ever did. I'm sure that's very rewarding in many ways as well.

And I mean, what I really enjoyed about this film, Chris, is now I have other films of yours to go and look at because this was my introduction to your work. And it really impressed me. And I think what's really important to keep in mind, too, is you're challenging these issues. You're challenging Hollywood, even. I mean, your films are not this,

cookie cutter spoon-fed to you thing that we're so used to seeing. I mean, I had so many questions after watching the film, so I'm so happy we got to sort of unpack some of those here today. But yeah, I really enjoy the fact that you're not giving us all the answers because we probably will never get those. Let's be completely honest. But at least we're trying. And I think what's important with the UFO topic is we haven't found an answer in 70 plus years. And I think it might be time to start asking new questions. So I'm so happy you were able to do that. Oh, thank you. Yes. I think that, I think that that suggestion is a very good one. Yeah. New questions. Absolutely. Well, in terms of new questions, Chris, my last question for you here. Can you explain theatrical at

home for us and how and where we can find the 11th Green? Sure. You know, when the 11th Green was ready to be released, unfortunately, and it coincided with the quarantine, and as a result of that, most theaters were closed everywhere. So we began working with a platform that was started by a producer friend of mine from Oregon, and she had had a successful release of her previous film, Phoenix, Oregon, utilizing this method. So basically, let's see, a ticket purchase of the film to watch the film now benefits the theater. The revenue is split with the theater. So it's as if, you know, you had made an in-person

attendance, and the theaters are listed, you know, on the side, and you can choose one from a drop-down menu that you want to support. And that's the way it's available right now. And then it will eventually transition into a more conventional VOD type of release on the usual platforms, iTunes and Amazon's, but not until probably later in September. But for the time being, the easiest way to find the film is just through my website, Christopher Munch.com. And there's, you can't miss it. There's a link right there that will take you to the purchase page at Theatrical at Home.

And then there's a recorded Q&A discussion, a post-screening discussion that's included with that. And we will be having a live Q&A coming up on July 20th, which anybody who buys a ticket the film will also have the opportunity to see and will be invited to participate in. So there's one film festival date coming up that I should mention this Tuesday, the 14th, at Maine, a conventional, well, it's not conventional, it's a drive-in theater in Scalhegan, Maine, a very reputable, distinguished older film festival, programmed by Ken Eisen. So that's the Maine International Film Festival on the 14th. But for most of your audience, who is not in Maine, The best way to see the film is simply to go to my website, Christopher Munch.com. That's awesome. And, you know, it's 2020, Chris.

Who would have thought drive-in movie theaters would be making a return, right? Oh, yeah. I think it's great. It is. It really is. Well, I have to thank you for coming on today, Chris. This is fascinating. Please, everyone go check out the movie, The 11th Green.

And Chris, thank you so much for joining me on Somewhere in the Skies. Thank you so much for having me, Brian. It's a pleasure. Somewhere in the Skies is produced by Third Kind Productions in association with the Entertainment One Podcast Network.