WHAT WENT WRONG - Twilight Zone: The Movie (Part 2)

Episode Date: September 22, 2020

The trial that changed Hollywood. This week Lizzie closes the books on Twilight Zone with a breakdown of the criminal proceedings against Director John Landis and four other crew members (charged and tried for involuntary manslaughter following the on-set deaths of actor Vic Morrow and two young children, Renee Shinn Chen and Myca Dinh Le).Go Ad-Free - Join Our Patreon!Check Out Our Merch!Follow Us on Instagram!What Movie's Next? Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hello, and welcome back to What Went Wrong. I am Chris Winterbauer here, as always, with my lovely co-host, Lizzie Bassett. Lizzie, how are you doing this fine Wednesday evening? Well, Chris, I decided to start a cleanse, and let me tell you, I'm not doing great. Between a cleanse and then a part two of this episode, I'm crying at network television. I think that's the only way to describe the way I'm doing right now. I feel the same way. I have not started a cleanse,

but I was supposed to drive to Oregon to see my family next week, and it's basically deciding between driving through the Hellscape Inferno of California being on fire and Oregon on fire, Mad Max style, or never seeing them again. So, you know, a lot of big choices to make at this point.

But we do have some silver linings here, wrong use of that term, but we got a new review. And I think we should definitely share it. It is from Chica Azzo. Zul from this last Saturday, quote, excellent podcasts, not just for film nerds. When I fall in love with a film, I always enjoy taking a deep dive into the story behind the story. That's what motivated me to give this podcast to listen, and it quickly became one of

my faves. The hosts have an easy, friendly vibe with just the right amount of... Whoa! Oh my God. Well, we're going to cut that out. No, we're not. My mom is going to Dissot me with just the right amount of humor infused into all the great details and nerdy facts. Why is she just hitting on the nerd thing here? Bonus, their voices are very pleasant. Thank you. That's the only part of the review I really wanted you to read. And we appreciate that, Chika Azul.

And as a reminder, if anybody else would like to be publicly berated by Chris for leaving a review, that's the prize. So please keep it up. Five stars, five stars. All right. Let's get into it. So Lizzie, this week, as you informed me earlier, we are diving back into the most depressing episode we've ever done, Twilight Zone, colon, the movie. And this will cover the trial, I believe you mentioned last time. I watched footage of the helicopter accident. No, Chris, I literally told you not to. And that's specifically when I went to. thought it out to find it. And it was so much worse than I thought it would be because, like, it looks so dangerous this footage. It's Vic Morrow in waste deep water being whipped by what looks like hurricane strength winds

from every direction. There are explosions all around him. It is, you can't see anything. It's either pitch black or blinding bright. He's got two children under each arm. just trudging through the water and to think that his realization that these children were going to die with him as this helicopter came down on him. It was so horrifying. You described it incredibly well in the last episode, but watching it, I was speechless.

I had the same experience. So just to give a little bit of background for anybody that doesn't know what we're talking about, go back and listen to part one, which is two episodes ago on. of Twilight Zone the movie. What Chris is referring to, which is, you know, what that episode is entirely about, is the helicopter accident that occurred on the set of Twilight Zone the movie, which resulted in the deaths of Vic Morrow and two very young children. I had the same experience as Chris when I watched the footage.

I was looking through basically old news footage. And first of all, the news was different in the 80s because they show it over and over again. The one thing I will tell you so that you don't do what Chris did. watch it is that the thing that stuck out to me the most watching that footage is how close that helicopter is to them. Like you hear 25 or 20 to 30 feet when we're talking about the descriptions, but to actually see it, it's insane. Like there's, there is, I can't, it blows my mind, everything that we're about to talk about with the trial that you couldn't just show that footage once and have them all go, okay, case closed. It's nuts. The best way I could think to describe

bit is imagine being on a basketball court at the free throw line and there's a helicopter directly above the hoop. That's how close it looked. It is shocking. So today, as Chris said, we're going to be walking through the trial that resulted from this and how it very much changed Hollywood and movie making, thankfully for the better. At the very end, we're going to have a little story time from Eddie Murphy. So make sure you stick around for that because boy, is that a doozy. Now, the crash was caught on tape by no less than six cameras. So there were six different camera angles of this thing. Not to mention the six people who were on the helicopter, they all survived, and the hundreds of crew who were around. Like, this is not a thing where there weren't enough

witnesses. There were plenty of witnesses. Let's actually hear from one of the camera guys on the helicopter the day after the accident. He's speaking to a news reporter. Randy Robinson, a 16-year veteran does not blame the producers of the film, but he says movie making should be safer. Here's what he saw last night. We just got bombed out of the sky. First blast it went off. They kept saying, get lower, lower, and then the blast went off. Camerman Randy Robinson said the first bomb blast was stronger than he expected. It ricocheted off a wall, backfired into the helicopter. The crew tried to maneuver the craft out. The point when the chopper started to go down, we started scrambling and we were outside on the runners.

tried to get inside and the things started spinning around and then all you could see was just blazing fire everywhere you looked and then if you and people running from the trees that we were going next to and then we started spinning and tumbling like a a whirlig you know and you just and I thought I had this premonition that was something going to happen and then it just and then I thought that's crazy and then it was happening the reason I granted this interview is that I feel that I'd like to I'd like to I think it's time that camera assistance and camera people stop getting killed to do movies you know it's uh there's uh there's got to be a safer way of doing this, and it's got to be a stronger control over how producers

go about shooting these scenes. It's an amazing thing to me that 100 people weren't killed. I mean, the chopper, if Dorsey couldn't have pulled it out of that bank, we would have been right into that, the crane and three other cameras and 40, 50 other people standing around. Yeah. Yeah. When they show some overhead shots in that clip of the helicopter downed in the river, And a couple things come to mind.

A, it looks like a shot from Vietnam. Yeah. Because of the foliage and stuff. And B, you see the radius of the chopper blades. And it's like somebody swinging a samurai sword in a disco. I mean, it's like he said, it's shocking that more people weren't hurt by this. Yeah. He very clearly says that the helicopter was being directed to go lower.

He doesn't say who was doing it, but he says that he for sure heard that. So that is interesting that that was the day after the crash, because as we will see, testimony starts to change once we get to the actual trial. A couple of things happened immediately following the accident. One of them is that Rolling Stone publishes an article examining the event and Landis's culpability. Immediately following the release of that article, and this is so interesting to me, a bunch of directors banded together to write an open letter in Landis's defense, including John Houston, Sidney Lumet, Francis, Francis, Ford Coppola, George Lucas, Billy Wilder, and Fred Ziniman. Basically, the thesis of that letter was that the director's only job is the sort of like art of designing movies, and that ultimately they, quote, depended on the skills and professional

responsibility of others in production. It's kind of the Donald Trump defense. It's like he isn't actually responsible for what he's doing because it's up to the people around him to put the right safeguards in to prevent him from violating, you know, the norms of office, so to speak. Right. But then when everyone is saying that it's impossible to get a word in or not be told no, like what are they supposed to do? Well, it's interesting. It almost speaks to maybe an older form of Hollywood in the sense that like if you were to go back to like the 1940s, 50s studio control version where the director was solely maybe responsible for the artistic

aspect of the production and there were people that could overrule him, maybe that would have been true back then. But the fact is, Francis Ford Coppola, when he shot Apocalypse now in the Philippines, what he said went. Yeah. No one was going to override his decision. I think it just, it shows a real deep fear from these people that potentially this is something that they could have seen themselves doing. Like, that's what I see from this. Or potentially like liability and like retroactively as well. And the sense that, you know, similar to the Me Too movement, oh, are we all of a sudden going to litigate all these past events? You know, there's that kind of fear, I think, that comes out with a lot of these men as well. When they recognize the behavior, oh, wait, all of a sudden we're saying this is wrong?

Right. I didn't know that. Right, yeah, it's not his fault. Notably missing from that list is Steven Spielberg, who, of course, was a co-producer on the entire movie and a producer of this segment. Let's just say Spielberg and Landis are on opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of how they handle this. So that brings us to one of the next things that happens very soon after the event, which is Vic Marrow's funeral. His funeral was held on July 25, 1982. And what I'm about to tell you was according to Marro's longtime friend, Dick Peabody, who had a small part in combat, which is the show that Vic Morrow had been on.

Dick was a pallbearer and had been asked by the family to give a eulogy. Now, as he's sitting in the front of the chapel to begin, he notices that the crowd seems uncomfortable, and there's sort of a wave coming through the room. He turns around to find out why. John Landis, somehow too frail to walk on his own, is being supported as he slowly marches down the aisle, supported by his wife and George Folsey Jr. Associate producer, R. Yep. Landis, by the way, not invited to the funeral, let alone invited to speak, proceeds to get up and present a eulogy. in which he stated that he was, quote, proud to have directed Vic in what Vic himself considered the best performance of his career.

He also said, quote, tragedy strikes in an instant, but film is immortal. Vic lives forever. I feel like he was one line away from saying, and you can see more of Vic in the summer of 1983 when Twilight Zone the movie comes out. Literally. This was like a stop on the press tour.

The way that this was handled was appalling, honestly. It would be inappropriate. Like, that line, film lives forever. If he had not died on a film set, okay, yeah, say that. But it would be inappropriate for anyone to drop that line,

let alone the guy who may have been directly responsible, like is yet to be determined by a court of law, for his death. Peabody points out that he did this, presumably, on the advice of his attorney. Peabody also points out that Morrow's ex-wife and girlfriend

both said that Morrow thought the Twilight Zone movie was a piece of shit. But he also attended at the very least Renee Chen's funeral, and there are pictures of him very prominently front and center at that as well. I couldn't find out if he was at the little boy's funeral. But either way, just, man, I can't imagine being the family. And... Yeah, I'm of mixed feelings. Like, on the one hand, I can understand why he would want to be there and maybe understand... I understand, but if you're not invited, like, that's a situation. Yeah, that's the thing. If he was invited, yes, you should go. Yeah. If you're not invited, don't go. And especially

don't go and then give a... speech on top of that. That's insane. I mean, whatever. All right, the next things that happen, May 31st, 1983, is almost a year after. L.A. County grand jury opens hearings and Landis testifies voluntarily. At this point, I think he and the rest of the crew think like, this is gonna go away. June 16th, despite Landis having testified, Landis, Dan Allingham, who is the production manager, and George Fulsey, who, as we stated, was the associate producer, are indicted for involuntary manslaughter. So this is like a bomb just got dropped on them and on Hollywood. One day later, Dorsey Wingo, the helicopter pilot and Paul Stewart, the special effects coordinator, are also

indicted. And Dorsey Wingo's pilot license is revoked. June 24, 1983, all five are arraigned on the same day that Twilight Zone the movie premieres. Also in 1983, Vic Maro's daughters actually do settle with Landis and the producers for an undisclosed amount out of court. It's worth noting that it was probably in both parties' interests to settle quickly in the sense that for Vic Marrow's family and daughter, if they were to wait for a criminal court to reach a verdict, there's a chance that exoneration would lead to a weakening in their civil case. Then it's in Landis's best interest to settle because that could actually look favorable going into the criminal court. This family's not pursuing me anymore. We settled our, you know, differences before we went into this. Notable that the parents of the two children that died did not settle prior to the trial.

I wonder if they didn't have access to the same caliber of returning either. I'm sure they didn't. You know what I mean? These are immigrant parents in both instances, one from Vietnam, versus, you know, the daughter of a Hollywood star. So March 6, 84, the National Transportation Safety Board submits their initial report. Now, they had started the investigation into the crash almost immediately after it happened. Landis petitions for it to be revised pretty much immediately, and we will get to Y in a minute. It is revised, and that doesn't get resubmitted until October 30th. However, whatever he wanted removed from that report didn't work, because on April 3rd, 1984, all five are ordered to stand trial for manslaughter for the deaths of Vic Morrow, Renee Chen, and Micah Din Lee.

One thing we noticed in the last episode is that they are not actually charged for hiring the kids illegally, which is still, I don't get. Like, it's a bit bizarre. We were chatting a little bit before this. I think it may be because they were trying to get bigger charges like child endangerment, which they were charged with, to stick. Yeah. It also might have, like, fractured the prosecution where more people would have had to

been charged because there were probably more people involved in the chain of hiring the kids. That's true. And then Dorsey Wingo, VFX supervisor, production manager. They're not charged for that. They're not. And it would have just, the focus, maybe it would have been two. You know what I mean? Who knows the amount of one I just kept it in one contained thing. Yeah. But anyway, so that's the one thing that John Landis had always said, you know,

oh, if they'd charged me with that, I would have pled guilty to it. They didn't charge him with it. So let's listen to John Landis's reactions when he found out that he was officially going to stand trial. I can think of nothing worse than losing your child. And our hearts go out to the families of Renee Chen and Mika. Lee and Vic Morrow, the idea that this could have been anything but an unforeseeable accident is not only wrong, it's bewildering. The problem, yeah, I'm sure he was told by his attorney that that's what he should say, but the problem is it's just, it's obviously not unforeseeable.

Yeah. You can't look at something floating in the air and say, it's inconceivable that that could crash to the ground. So let's get into the actual report that the National Transportation Safety Board submitted. It is exhaustive. I read the whole thing. I would say I understood maybe 10% of it because it's a lot of technical things about helicopters that I didn't understand. But basically, what they concluded was that the crash had been caused by the detonation of an explosive that destroyed the tailroader of the helicopter, causing it to spin out of control and crash land in the stream. They also state that it had been hovering 25 feet above the...

ground at the time of explosion. So the 25 feet note is really important, and that's what we were talking about with the height of the helicopter, because the report also states that had the helicopter been at a higher altitude, even if it had lost its tail rotor, Dorsey Wingo may have been able to enter into what's called an auto-rotative descent, which basically is a strategy that reduces the thrust on the tail rotor and allows a pilot a chance at a controlled landing, even if they've lost their tail rotor. However, because they were hovering 25 feet over the ground, there's absolutely no way that he could control this landing. That's a big deal. That means that this was a bad choice on the coordinators and also on the pilots part because he was an experienced pilot,

but again, not an experienced stunt or movie pilot. If he had been flying at an appropriate height and the detonation was deemed to be the cause of the accident, his liability would seemingly go away. Yes, I think that's accurate. And then it would just be on the effects and landis. But the point is because he's responsible ultimately for the height of the helicopter, he's still on the hook in this instance. Unfortunately, yes. He's also on the hook because the report very clearly states that he and other crew members had expressed concern about the shoot earlier, which surprisingly is actually not good news for Dorsey Wingo because it shows that he, the pilot, knew this was potentially hazardous. And in the long run, the pilot is the one person in control of the vehicle. It technically was his job to say, no, no, fuck you.

and to fly away, which is hard. That's really hard. I understand this guy's situation. Like, when you're being told by super famous movie directors and producers to just stick with it, I get it. It also states that he should have basically required a direct line of communication to the special effects team, which he didn't have at all. The only people he was talking to were the unit production manager and the special effects coordinator. So he didn't have a direct line to the people who were actually firing off the explosives. Here is the piece of analysis I suspect Landis may have been trying to get removed. This is just my theory. I don't know. Quote, additionally, apparently in response to commands from the director, he, Wingo,

modified the maneuver and flew lower over the surface of the river and closer to the huts than had been originally intended, as established by the observation of the cameraman on the left skid and the cameraman on the north shore of the river. They conclude that the root cause of the accident was really a failure to establish clear communication. between the pilot and the director. That is still their conclusion, even in the revised version. That's pretty damning. I don't know what else you do with that. That's saying that multiple people clearly said

that John Landis was asking him to alter the maneuver and go lower than he was comfortable going. Yeah. And we should also remind people that this is at what, two in the morning that this happens? Like 2 a.m. People are tired. I'm sure they'd been shooting for days and days.

So you're dealing with an incredibly difficult maneuver in the middle of the night with, children. And it hadn't been rehearsed either, is my understanding. No, it was never rehearsed at the full level it was going to be performed. It's not when you decide to turn it into jazz and improvise. No. Also, as a reminder to listeners, there had been an incident three hours earlier with the helicopter where an explosive was detonated again too close to it, and it actually resulted in some burns to Dorsey Wingo. So, like, he was already literally singed and concerned. So now we're going to get into the actual trial itself, which is like one of the most

Hollywood trials. I mean, when we think of sort of Hollywood trials, I think of like OJ Simpson, these ones that are super televised and very like theatrical, this one 100% fits that bill, not just because John Landis was trotting out his famous friends to sit into the courtroom and making sure to shake their hands outside. One time he was actually outside greeting his friends and decided not to sit in for the testimony of, I believe, the mother of the six-year-old girl who was killed. Here's where it starts to get interesting for all my true crime fans out there. In 1985, the initial prosecutor is a man named Gary Kesselman, and he has suddenly taken off the case and replaced with Deputy District Attorney Leah Purwin-Dagostino.

Kesselman later claims that he was removed because he refused to allow a witness's testimony who he believed was not credible. That witness was Donna Schumann. the production secretary we mentioned in episode one. And she is a key part of the prosecution's case because Donna is testifying that Landis and Folsey had joked about going to jail for hiring the kids, specifically that they had joked about going to jail for hiring the kids to work near explosives,

which is a huge qualifier. Because it's not just about them hiring them illegally. It's about them hiring them illegally for a dangerous situation. Leah Degostino, however, says that she didn't even know about Donna's statements until, Donna told her in passing. Now remember, these would have been statements that Donna had theoretically made three years earlier when she was talking to Kesselman and the people that were beginning the investigation. The new prosecutor also said that she believed her case may have been

getting sabotaged from the inside so that there was someone in the district attorney's office who was withholding information from her. So interesting that he says he believes Donna Schumann is not a credible witness because he actually used something that she said in passing in her earlier testimony to dismiss claims that John Landis and co were doing large quantities of cocaine on set of the Twilight Zone.

She said basically just, oh, John Landis doesn't do cocaine. He was like, ah, she's the most credible woman I've ever heard. Drop the charge. And then all of a sudden, he's saying that she's a liar when it comes to her having said that she heard this joke. So very interesting. I want to play a little clip of actually Donna Schumann herself

discussing this little snafu. Why did Vic Morrow and two small children go out to make a motion picture and die? Is there any motion picture worth that? The film's production secretary, Donna Schumann, testified that Lannis often ignored warnings that the scene was dangerous. But defense attorney say she's lying. We can't all be liars. Why would I lie?

First of all, love Donna Schumann. She has a very dynasty vibe to her. How much Ambien is she on right now? Why would I lie? Between like her 1980s Farrah Fawcett blowout. That's what I'm talking about. This trial is like banana grams. The people that come out of the woodwork for this are interesting.

So let's actually talk about the prosecutor for a second. Leah Perwin Dagestino was a former assistant to David O. Selznick, mega producer, Gone with the Wind, among many other things. Oh, interesting. Yeah. So she had a background in Hollywood. She had experience on sets. She had some interest in Hollywood, obviously,

but had become a very successful deputy district attorney. Well, she probably saw all these people, and she was like, we can prosecute the fuck out of them. And then she, like, went and worked for the deputy attorney. I hope so. I have to say, watching all the news footage and the interviews and, like, reading the articles of this trial, it made my blood boil the way they were talking about her

because they refer to her as the dragon lady. That's the nickname that she's gotten. I guess because she, like, wears nice suits. I don't know. It's like, it makes no sense. She always wore a bee pin on her, like, heavily shoulder-patted 80s pantsuits, and they were like, oh, it's because she thinks she's the queen bee. And I'm like, what if she likes bees? I don't know. Like, this is not. I think any, yeah, like, it was like Marsha Clark had that also, you know, it's a very Marcia Clark vibe. Yeah. I think any professional woman who was attempting to do her job that required her to be, quote, antagonistic, it was like, well.

get a load of this one who's trying to take us all down. Yeah. And by the way, they all refer to her in trial as being, oh, she's so theatrical, very theatrical. But let's talk about some of the defense team for a second because you want to talk about theatrical. First of all, I have to say, I was in model judiciary in high school. I almost wanted to be a lawyer. All of these lawyers, particularly did the defense team, which are like the best defense attorneys ever, are kind of amazing. So the main attorney, Landis's main attorney, was a man named James F. Neal, who had successfully defended Elvis Presley's doctor, who was prescribing him all of the pills that allegedly led to his death.

And he got him off. Among other clients of James F. Neal, Ford, after their Pintoes were, you know, blowing up and killing people. He also represented Exxon after the Exxon Valdez Alaskan oil spill. That's one of the only ones he lost. Interesting guy, also served as a prosecutor on Chief Trial Counsel on the Watergate Special Prosecution Force. Interesting. So just like basically the best lawyer of money could buy. One of the other main defense attorneys who is actually still very active today is Harland Braun. And we will hear from him again a little bit later.

He is a bit younger than James F. Neal. I think he was Folesy's main attorney. Boy is his client list a doozy. Roman Flansky, when he sued to get back into the academy, Robert Blake, he actually dropped Robert Blake as a client when Blake did an interview. He didn't condone. He's unbelievably good at what he does. And we'll hear from him a little bit later, something that actually really made me like him,

surprisingly. Okay, so the trial doesn't start until 1986. It is a 10-month-long trial. The jury listens to nearly 100 witnesses, including Landis himself, who, by the way, vehemently states that he still doesn't think the scene was, quote, inherently dangerous. To be fair, even if he did believe that, there's no way his lawyer is going to let him say that he believes that the scene was inherently dangerous. Oh, also, a little fun fact, Dorsey Wingo, when he took the stand, pretty much blamed Vic Morrow for not getting out of the way of his helicopter blades fast enough.

So if you had any sympathy for Dorsey Wingo, throw that right out the window. Don't need that anymore. So let's take a look at Landis on the stand and some of the quote-unquote theatricality. that we were seeing from the prosecutor. Mr. Landis, my question was, when you told Vic Morrow to trip, when you had this plan that he would trip, was it also planned that he would drop Renee or almost drop Renee or lose his grip on Renee?

Was that also planned? We did not discuss dropping Renee, and I don't believe he did. Well, you have seen the footage on how many occasions, sir. As often as this jury and twice before that. You only saw it twice before this jury saw? It's very hard for me. You watch. I'm sorry.

Your Honor, would you like some Kleenex, sir? No, thank you. It just, this is, these are the things that was, that was making me just yell, yell at my computer as I was, like, going through this. He does a Drake-style hand to one side, like, Drake meme, like, it's very hard for me to think about. The AD also testified that he'd asked them to use dummies or stunt doubles and had brought out the concerns the day that he read the script. To be fair, that is just a standard suggestion to use dummies.

Stunt doubles they should have. Dumbies they shouldn't have used. He said use stunt doubles, use little people for the children. Like, why would you not do that? That's the wild thing about the shot. You can't tell it. Actually, the kids could have been dummies. That's the saddest thing.

When you watch the clip, you're just like, I can't even see them. No. Like, you just, it's just these things under his arms. And what John Landis just said under oath, by the way, when he was like, I don't believe he did. First of all, he dropped the little girl. Yeah, they actually played the clip right before,

and you see him drop her. And you were like, oh, yeah, he dropped her. Yeah, there were people that testified saying that that was a thing that he'd asked Vic Morrow to kind of choreograph a stumble. Like, he's just up there being like, no, I don't think, I didn't see that. And it's like, you just watched it.

You just watched the same thing everybody else watched. But, okay, there was some weirdness on both sides. For one thing, the prosecutor had the smart idea of bringing the jury out to the crash site. And now she wanted to have a helicopter fly a hundred feet over the jury. The judge says, no, no. He says, you can go out there before the jury.

You can have a helicopter fly 100 feet over you. But not the jury, because that's a little too prejudicial. Which, interesting. Anyway, the defense also argued heavily against the jury being taken to screening rooms in Hollywood to watch the crash footage, but lost that fight. So in a really weird, a weird night at the movies, the jury, watched the crash from all six different angles over and over again on the big screen in the studio's screening rooms, which is just really strange. I mean, I guess they were saying

useful to see it, you know, in a theatrical setting because that's what they intended it for. I think that was certainly a move by the prosecutor to like, you know, to horrify them more, which I get. I don't know that that was necessary. One of the only actual filmmakers who was willing to take the stand for the prosecution was Jackie Cooper, who was one of the original Little Rascals. He was also Harry White in several Superman movies, and he directed a ton of TV at the time. They were basically calling him as like expert testimony. He said he felt that the accident had already resulted in a greater awareness of safety. In fact, that he'd been appointed the chairman of the DGA's safety board, which did not exist prior to this accident. So obviously something

had already happened there. He also was adamant that there was absolutely no reason that this stunt should have occurred or continued. He made the point that, you know, like we've said, there was an incident earlier in the night that clearly showed that there was a problem. He said, if this was my set, I would have shut it down. No questions asked. So good for you, Jackie Cooper, because a awful lot of people were very scared to testify. He was also uniquely qualified. He was the first child actor nominated for an Academy Award. And he was in an episode of the original run of the Twilight Zone. Wow. Interesting. I just also feel like, I mean, Maybe he was old. He felt like he didn't have much to lose and like it was worth speaking up. But like, so many people were very afraid of speaking up in this trial and said as much. And people who did speak up later on said that their careers never recovered because nobody would hire them. Now remember, all the prosecution is trying to prove is that the defendants acted with criminal negligence that resulted in three deaths, that they placed them in inherent danger, which resulted in their deaths. It seems pretty cut and dry. That's really all it is. The defense's entire argument is that this was unforesee.

That's the only difference. Was there any way for them to be able to ascertain that this was a dangerous situation prior to the shoot, or was it completely unforeseeable? That's it. That's the distinction on these charges. Before we get to the result of the trial, let's hear from Hollywood reporter, reporter, Richard Zaradnik. And then the second voice you're going to hear in this clip is actually Jack Lemon. You have the prosecution trying to establish that experts on the set knew there was a problem and then communicated that to the director. They haven't quite got that link yet.

But I think if they get it and then there's a guilty verdict, there'll be a lot of surprised people. If they are found guilty, then God knows everybody else. The minute they approach a stunt in a film, they're going to be very, very careful about it, you know, and how they do it, et cetera. I don't think that they'll shy away from doing things that are necessarily dangerous. It's that they will be very careful how they do it and that everybody involved is, you know, a top professional in that particular field. Whatever did happen and out of the horror of the result, I can only hope that whether everybody is innocent or not or whatever, that at least on the plus side, it can make us more aware of what can happen. Making films can be very, very dangerous.

There's no question of that. So that was Jack Lemon. And I, I think, think it's interesting. A lot of the people that we are seeing speaking up about it are showing enthusiasm for the change that can and should come from this. A lot of them are actors, too, which I think is interesting, because if there's anybody who's the most, in many ways, vulnerable on set and who has, like, the least control, it's the actors. I think it's interesting that there's a bit of a parallel right now with coronavirus, where because of liability issues that coronavirus presents, it's requiring a complete reworking of safety protocols on set, many of which a lot of people hope will actually help movies be made in a more safe way,

through reducing working hours, through limiting the amount of contact between departments on set, which could actually lead to safer sets as people are not like careening in every direction at the same time carrying expensive lights and heavy equipment and hot gear. And then a lot of it comes down to the actors because, like you said, ultimately the actors take the risk. As a director, I don't have to touch anyone, but an actor might have to do an intimate scene or a fight scene, or they might have to do a stunt where they're grappling with another individual. With all the safety stuff, for the most part, it's camera people and actors. Those are the two people that are going to be in harm's way.

So after all that being said, and after nine days of deliberation, on May 29, 1987, all five defendants are found not guilty on all charges. Wow. Those included charges of child endangerment, by the way. not guilty. John Landis gives some remarks on what a terrible time in his life it has been. Thanks, John.

Yeah, thanks, John. Lest you get too bummed out, things did change in Hollywood for the better. In addition to productions adhering more strictly to child labor laws, the following were put in place. The FAA had actually only recently, as in that year, passed regulations about how aircraft

should be handled on movie sets, but even that still only covered fixed wing aircrafts. So after this accident, it was recommended they also put regulations in place for helicopters, requiring a waiver to be acquired, which they did. Warner Brothers set up safety committees to finally regulate every potentially hazardous aspect of filmmaking. This resulted in the safety manuals that are now required to be distributed on every major film set. The DGA began disciplining directors who did not adhere to safety measures on set, which they had not done prior to the accident. SAG encouraged actors to speak up when they felt uncomfortable and developed a safety hotline they could call if they were concerned.

In fact, a SAG spokesman told the Washington Post in 1987 that between the crash and then, injuries on set had dropped from 214 in a year to 65. It also basically created the risk management position on sets. That kind of just didn't exist. And if it did exist, it was just somebody in an office. It wasn't someone who actually was on set. there was a guy who is a very high-level risk manager, and he was like, this accident literally created my job. So, fortunately, it seems like a lot of Hollywood actually did learn from this,

which is great. However, Landis, not so much. One year after the trial, John Landis invited all the jury members to a special screening of coming to America as a thank you. Even two of the team's defense attorneys, including Harland Braun, which I promised we would hear from again, said they thought this was gross. That is not a direct quote, but that is the general sentiment. I bet you Harlan Braun said it was in poor taste. He actually had some, he had some harsh words. He went so far as to wonder why the dead children's parents were not invited. Wow. He's right. I know. Don't thank the jury. It's not like they did you a solid. They did do him a solid. I mean, that's no, I know. That's the thing. Yeah. It's just bad.

Yeah, you get a very clear picture of how he viewed this entire thing. And I find, I find, it's so interesting that one of their defense attorneys was like, this is gross. This is gross. Like, don't do this. So speaking of coming to America, I would like to close with a little story time from Eddie Murphy, as promised. This is all from a Playboy article in I believe 1990, maybe. The interviewer asks him why he didn't choose to direct Coming to America himself. Now, again, John Landis directed Coming to America. It was one of the top grossing films of the year, and it released a year after he's acquitted from involuntary manslaughter on a set. Also, to be clear, other people who came forward to speak said that they were unable to find work

after the trial, but John Lannis had no problem finding work. No. So anyway, the interviewer asks Eddie Murphy, why didn't you choose to direct coming to America? Eddie Murphy was a massive star at the time. In fact, he had gone on to direct Harlem Knights later in 1989, which is why he's doing this interview. Like, clearly, he wanted to direct. Murphy replies, quote, I wanted to help out, Landis.

I figured I'd give this guy a shot because his career was fucked, but he wound up fucking me." And quote, and what a way to get into what we're about to talk about here. So, Murphy goes on to explain that what he comes to find out on the Coming to America set is that John Landis had always been secretly pissed off that Eddie Murphy didn't show up to the Twilight Zone trial and show his support publicly. No. Yes. Oh, this is like the Sopranos now all of a sudden. Literally.

Jesus. And when the interviewer asked Eddie Murphy if he thought John Landis was guilty, basically Murphy's like, listen, I'm not going to weigh judgment on that, but I will tell you this, I didn't feel comfortable showing up. He never explicitly says that he thought Landis was guilty, but he does say, quote, if you're directing a movie and two kids get their heads chopped off at fucking 12 o'clock at night when there ain't supposed to be kids working and you said action, then you have some sort of responsibility. Yeah, pretty simple. Pretty simple. And I like what Eddie Murphy had to say about not coming to court, too. He was basically just like, look, no, I'm not going to show up and be on your team in the bleachers. Like, if I think you did something wrong, I'll still be your friend.

I'll tell you I love you and I'll support you. But I'm not going to go out there and be like you didn't do anything wrong, which like this made me like Eddie Murphy a lot. Essentially, it turns out, Eddie Murphy had to pull like all the strings he had at Paramount to get Landis hired. For obvious reasons, Paramount was very hesitant. Then instead of being grateful, John Landis turns around. and demands craploads of money for this job, way above the asking price, which they give him because of Eddie Murphy.

Eddie Murphy again comes to the table for his friend and is like, just help this guy out. Like he paid so many legal fees, that's probably why he's doing this. Let's help him. Then when he gets to the set, John Landis is an unbelievable jerk to Eddie Murphy specifically the whole time.

He shows up saying stuff like, I'm the boss, I'm the director. Evidently, one of his favorite things to do on set was to remind Eddie Murphy that Landis had worked with Michael Jackson, and he was the only person brave enough to tell Michael Jackson, quote, fuck you. Now, let's unpack this a little. I think it's very interesting.

He's bringing up one of the only prominent other black men that he'd worked with in his career and that he wasn't afraid to tell him, fuck you. So there's quite a lot going on there that he's saying this to Eddie Murphy. Finally, Murphy has two writers come to visit the set. who co-wrote coming to America, and we're working on developing a new sitcom with Murphy's company. Landis sees them and starts grilling them about why they're in New York, and if Eddie Murphy has paid them yet,

which, by the way, wouldn't make sense they were developing a show to be sold. Eddie Murphy walks in. Here's what John Landis is saying. Quote, Eddie, your company is fucking these guys out of their money. Guys, don't be afraid to go up to Eddie and say, fuck you. He's screaming about my deal-making in front of the cast. So, Eddie Murphy takes him in kind of a playful chokehold. John Landis then tries to...

I just hear him laughing like, oh, you know, that like Donkey Shrek laugh as he's like choking him out. He is. Well, he does it playfully at first. John Landis then tries to, quote, playfully punch him in the balls. So Eddie Murphy cuts off his windpipe

and drops John Landis to the ground immediately. John Landis evidently ran offset in a fury. Now he comes back to Eddie Murphy's trailer later and goes on a rant about how Eddie Murphy is an ignorant, untalented asshole, how he only took coming to America for the money. and that he never respected Murphy after he didn't show up for the trial. Well, I have nothing insightful to say.

Yeah. If you want a wild ride, read that interview with Eddie Murphy. He does not hold back on anything. And like, why would you? This is such an insane response to somebody who is trying to help you rehabilitate your career. And honestly, John Landis was able to keep making films. Like, this is what blows my mind, is that this person can, continued to get work. Which is obviously not a trend that's left Hollywood,

as currently somehow Brian Singer continues to work. Just to end on a better note, someone who did learn from all of this is Steven Spielberg. When asked about the crash, he said, quote, no movie is worth dying for. I think people are standing up much more now than ever before to producers and directors who ask too much. If something isn't safe,

it's the right and responsibility of every actor or crew member to yell cut. Yeah. And I think that's great. And I mean, I'm thrilled because Spielberg, I think, is the greatest director overall of all time. And that makes me happy because you want them to be ethical people. And I think he is. I do too. Yeah. And if, you know, he's done more spectacular set piece scenes than Landis ever did. And he's done them safely, clearly. You know what I mean? And so you can clearly do it. You just can't cut corners when you're doing it. Yeah. Um, you know, know, it's what's unfortunate, and this is true with any industry, but it's especially unfortunate with film, is that it takes horrifying accidents and things to happen in order to

bring about the changes that then in retrospect, you're like, how is this not in existence to begin with? And obviously, most recently we saw that with the allegations against Harvey Weinstein and then subsequent unearthing of information that a lot of sex scenes, in various movies and television shows were being performed in a way where the actors felt unsafe. That included shows like The Deuce, which took a lot of pains in their second season

to get it right, shows like Smilf, et cetera, that the role of the intimacy coordinator was brought into existence. You're totally right. It's the same as the risk management. And it makes perfect sense. The minute it sounds like,

oh yeah, this is a highly incendiary, potentially traumatizing position that you're putting two people in where you're going to do the most intimate act that humans are aware of, and you're going to do it in a simulated in front of a room full of people and it's going to be put on film. Of course, we need someone here who can lock it down if the director is pushing things the wrong way. And there are examples of this that, you know, blue is the warmest color. I think it's a beautiful movie. And clearly that director just went off

the rails manipulating those two actresses to perform a lot of those scenes. And you need someone there when you're dealing with something that's potentially hazardous to a subordinate you need what's the equivalent of HR with teeth that can tell the director, no, you cannot do this. We don't care. Because however immortal film might be, it's not worth it. It's not worth traumatizing people.

It's not worth killing people. It's just not. It's just a movie. Well, the other thing is you can make a great movie without doing it. So it's not as if one requires the other. That's about it for us. We will be back next week. We appreciate all the reviews and the ratings we truly do.

We appreciate the suggestions we've been getting via email and Instagram DMs. We are reviewing them and we are liking them. We are digging it when you guys are sliding into our DMs, as the kids say, we will talk to you in seven days. I'm so sweaty. I think it's this cleanse. I don't feel good. To support what went wrong, gain access to bonus episodes.

Subscribe on Patreon, Apple, or Spotify for $5 a month. Patreon subscriptions also come with an ad-free RSS fee. You can also visit our website, What Went WrongPod.com, for more info. What Went Wrong is a sad boom podcast, presented by Lizzie Bassett and Chris Winterbauer. Post-production and music by David Bowman.