I am a longtime fan of Shakespeare, and "Richard III" in particular. I wrote the script for the creative pleasure of doing so, thinking I might perhaps be able to sell it - not expecting any significant profit, but at least perhaps the gratification of seeing it produced.

The script took nearly a year to complete. During the final few months, I gradually concluded that, to ensure that the film would be created according to my particular artistic vision, I wanted to produce and direct. Knowing that my lack of experience in film would be an impediment to the project, I compensated by setting a very long timetable - one year for preproduction - and set about finding an experienced production team.

One of the foremost reasons I chose to produce this film myself was to ensure that I could cast the film exactly as I did - to ensure that the cast would reflect the diversity of modern-day Los Angeles. In addition to a multiethnic cast, I further tried to make the film fit the modern era by emphasizing the strengths of the female characters, and by casting women in some of the traditionally male roles.

Since our budget was very limited (the film was made under the SAG Ultra-Low Budget parameters, financed by myself and a few business associates), I expected to cast relatively unknown performers. But the script met with an overwhelmingly positive reception in the acting community, and it was a tremendous pleasure to assemble such a talented and diverse cast, including David Carradine, Maria Conchita Alonso, Academy Award nominee Sally Kirkland, Sung Hi Lee, Richard Tyson, Danny Trejo, Lori Petty, Steven Williams, Marco Sanchez, Anne Jeffreys, TQ, Navid Neghaban, and many others.

I did not consider playing Richard myself, until long after I had decided to produce and direct the film. It was not a decision taken lightly; my reasons were:

a. artistic vision: so that Richard would be portrayed as I had written/envisioned him

b. I had more than a year, to prepare for this one role

c. let's face it: what Shakespeare fan could possibly resist the temptation to play Richard III on film? Chances like this don't come twice.

Principal photography lasted 3 weeks, in October - November 2005.  Unfortunately, family health problems compelled postproduction to be put on complete hiatus from November until April 2006, and intermittently since then. But finally, the film is now complete.

Some recent postings on IMDB have inquired: how much editing and revision has this script inflicted on Shakespeare's original play?  "How badly has the "holy text" of Shakespeare been desecrated?"

My goals with respect to the original text, as I wrote the script, were:

1. to subordinate the film to the text (i.e. to find a way to make the film fit the words, rather than vice versa)

2. to preserve the greatest possible proportion of the play (i.e. to delete as few lines as possible)

And the results?

a. every scene in the play is included in the film, with the exception of Act II scene 3, (Three citizens conversing) and Act III scene 6, (the Scrivener). As a point of honor, some of the dialogue from each of these scenes was included as background in other scenes. Act III Scene 3 is in the film, but without dialogue.

b. The original dialogue and archaisms (e.g. thee, thy, thou, etc.) have been preserved throughout the film, with only a few exceptions.

c. Characters:
Each of the major characters, and almost all of the secondary characters, are present in the film.

d. Dialogue:
- I tried, insofar as possible, to limit my editing to the deletion of individual (i.e. entire) lines. In some cases, I combined parts of two lines into one, preserving iambic pentameter whenever possible. In other cases, I deleted part of a line, sacrificing the meter for the sake of brevity.

- A few lines were given from one character to another (usually, to ensure that every character in the film had at least one line; i.e. to enable the actor/actress to have a speaking part).

-For various minor roles (e.g. newscasters) I used Shakespearean lines from other plays (and one line by John Milton)

-Princess Elizabeth, who has no lines in the play, was given 3 lines of dialogue: two adapted from other Shakespearean works, and one of my own devising.

-In several instances, I cobbled together lines (in iambic pentameter whenever possible) using some of Shakespeare's words with others of mine.

e. Scene order:
The order of a few scenes was rearranged. This necessitated, in various characters’ lines, changing the verb tense or altering the line.

and finally, a caveat……….

Having preserved to the maximum extent the dialogue and characters, I took the liberty and pleasure of weaving further exposition, sub-plot, and embellishment around the dialogue, taking whatever liberties I could within the constraints of preserving – with as few alterations as possible - Shakespeare’s immortal words. I assume that Will approves, since he has not contacted me with any complaints.