SFBG: Did you base anything on the film on anything that happened to you, regarding, say, the abstinence movement?

ML: No, it's not based on any real life experiences! [Laughs] I did Playboy Radio the other day, and this porn actress, Jenna Jameson, was on right before me, and they told her that the director of Teeth, a movie about vagina dentata, is coming on, and she said, "Oh, that’s a real thing! One out of a thousand chicks I bang have that." Which I found very bizarre.

The abstinence group you mentioned really came into it because in developing the main character's story, it really made sense. I became aware of these groups, and she had this event happen as a little girl [the film opens with a bloody little let's-play-doctor encounter between the main character, Dawn, as a child, and her stepbrother], and subconsciously she knew her body was different. It occurred to me that she would be really drawn to this group that wants her to delay knowledge of her body, too. So it just seemed like something that would be a very fitting thing for her and give us an opportunity to poke fun at the group.

SFBG: Why don't you think of the film as a horror flick? After all, look at all the castrated penises!

ML: I don’t think its strictly a horror film and I don't want horror fans to expect it to be. I guess The thing about it is it does take on different genres, and I was never obligated to channel it more into horror or more into comedy - I was in a nice position to kind of let it be what it is. And most movies get a little more channeled into one or the other. So it’s a dark comedy, a horror movie, it’s a coming-of-age story, but what's really good about it is, Jess Weixler plays Dawn so well that you take her character's story seriously, and I think that holds you in a deeper way to her.

SFBG: Why didn't have any pressure to skew the film in one way or another?

ML: It was very independently produced. We started going to independent places and weren’t getting any response. So I pumped some money into it and so did people outside the film business. So it didn’t go through any sort of committee - it's exactly what I want it to be.

SFBG: The material is so extreme - did you ever want to show the actual vagina dentata?

ML: I definitely went through that decision - I had to decide whether it was a good idea or not. It also would be NC-17. But finally I sort of wanted to keep Dawn in a bubble of purity - and innocence, even. She never has blood on her. I didn’t want a violent image associated with her directly. And there's something to be said for the imagination, but more, I didn’t want an ugly image associated with her or that body part.

SFBG: So Dawn remains virginal spiritually?

ML: I'm not into her remaining a virgin - she is able to have good sex and stuff. This isn’t an anti-sex movie.

SFBG: What about all the penises? No qualms there?

ML: For me, it goes with the territory. I had to show them. It goes to that extreme place. There could been fewer shots or shorter shots, whatever, but it was just the aesthetic I wanted. It was really enough to shock me and make my eyes widen and go over the top, but not too ridiculously over the top. For some slasher fans, it's really not enough, but luckily I only had to go by my taste.

The movie it's probably most like in a way is Carrie - because the characters have a very similar arc. There's similar stuff in this, where you don’t know whether it's meant to be funny because Piper Laurie is so over the top. And Carrie has a genuinely amusing subplot with John Travolta and Nancy Allen, and it has these teenagers and this religious thing, too. Certainly it has something in common with John Waters, and he saw movie at Berlin film festival, and he liked it. That’s nice.

SFBG: What made you want to direct it yourself?

ML: I probably wrote the first version of the screenplay in 2000. First I thought a woman should direct it, but the tone became so personal – not the subject but the mix of comedy - and no one else could come up with the same tone, so I decided to carry through with it. I directed a short film and then did this. From the time we really decided to do it, it was probably a year and a half.

SFBG: Do you think your courage to go to these dark places comes in part from growing up as the son of an artist? Watching other artists finding courage to go to those places?

ML: Not necessarily because it’s a dark place! But you're definitely encouraged to go with the bravest thing you have. When my father first started showing his work in the early '60s, it was considered unfit for high art.

I think he would have appreciated the audaciousness of [the movie and the act of making it]. He had a great sense of humor and I hope that rubbed off in the movie.

SFBG: You were also Camille Paglia's student at one time?

ML: I loved her! She was my adviser. She was great, really inspiring, took a lot of literature classes from her - this was late '70s - and she brought in high art and low art together, referencing everything together and with an equal weight. This was at Bennetton College in Vermont. So that was an inspiring way to look at the world. She saw the movie too and helped me out. In the movie, when Dawn is doing research online, the voice-over you hear, talking about the meanings and origins of the myth, Camille actually wrote for me - she had some good pithy input there.