|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Director and His DP
Much has been made of the "power struggle" that occurs at the producing level on a film. Producers face the challenge of keeping studios, directors, cast and crewmembers happy, and to ultimately deliver a film that meets everyone's expectations.
There are also creative struggles on a film set, as different individuals are certain to have varied ideas about creative direction. Ultimately, it is the director who leads this charge. As a first time director, Pete Jones was the first one on-set to admit that he was lacking experience. Pete lived and died by entrusting those around him to do what they did best.
Moviemaking is a director's medium, wherein the vision of a film begins and ends with the man or woman who is steering the ship. The director sets the course, and relies on a skilled support staff to help make it happen.
Toward the top of this creative food chain is the director of photography, or cinematographer. The DP is the cameraman, the individual who physically looks through the camera's viewfinder and determines the look, color, and texture of what appears in the frame of a shot. A DP manages a lighting team which creates mood through the use of natural and artificial light.
Of course, movies are about creative collaboration, and no two individuals need to be on the same page more so than the director and his DP. In a perfect world, these two spend a lot of time together in pre-production and determine a comprehensive shot list. They go scene by scene, and actually plan out every camera shot, its angle, the lighting, and the amount of time necessary to execute their desired shots.
Often, the 1st AD is needed to pare down the director and DP's wish list of shots, as it is the 1st AD who is constantly looking at his or her watch and keeping the production on schedule. A DP cannot just show up on set with the camera, and say "Hey, wouldn't it be cool if we could try doing it this way? And this way? And this way?"
Before we explore what happened on the day of the house fire sequence, there is one point that is worth repeating: The director is the creative captain of the ship on a movie set. If the director wants a light dimmed, a color of paint changed, or a costume accessorized, it is ultimately their decision. It is their film. Assuming none of these things require large amounts of money, crewmembers will defer to the director, whose vision is at the root of the entire production.
Because this was Pete Jones's maiden voyage on the rough seas of filmmaking, he had no choice but to defer to other, more experienced individuals to deliver certain pieces of the puzzle. One of the most glaring examples of this is his trust of DP Pete Biagi.
Biagi is an accomplished and skilled cinematographer, and Pete Jones gave Biagi a great deal of leeway in creating the visual texture of the film. To be sure, the two men collaborated on every minute that made it to the screen, but Pete Jones ultimately felt that Biagi knew his craft better than anyone, and the director empowered his cameraman to make big decisions.
On the day they were to shoot the film's biggest action sequence, the day that gave Pete the most anxiety, Biagi made some decisions, and did not make some decisions, that may have disrupted the production.
To begin with, when the art department and Pete Jones scouted the house that was to be burnt down the day before the shooting day, Biagi did not attend. He told the art department that the camera would only capture the front of the dilapidated house, and only the front needed to be dressed for the scene. Shooting day comes, and guess what? The side of the house will be seen in the shot, and the art department now needs to paint the second floor windows.
Biagi later finds it funny that the art department was so upset because they had to "paint a couple of window sills." What he fails to acknowledge is that, had he composed a shot list, or even scouted the location the day before, it would have saved the crew at least an hour on a very complex shooting day. This is an hour that could have been spent rehearsing with the actors and extras.
1st AD Bruce Terris was lamenting not having a shot list all day, saying, "My job...is to make sure that each person [on set] has a clear understanding of what we're shooting, when we're shooting, and why we're shooting it that way. A shot list expedites what happens on a production."
For a scene that requires so much planning and precision, devising shots on the fly could have easily been the ruin of such an ambitious moment in the film, particularly on a set that was stretching its dollars to their limit.
Four hours after call time, they are ready to roll tape. The first shot is hand-held, following Kevin Pollak's character approaching the burning house only to be stopped by "Joe," Aidan Quinn's character. After shooting a take that had both actors satisfied, Pete Jones tells Aidan that they will shoot it again, this time with the proper lens. At that point, Biagi has the unmitigated gall to tell Pete that these are problems that could have been avoided with proper rehearsal.
Toward the end of the day, the crew prepares its most logistically challenging shot: While Aidan's character is restrained from entering the burning house, a massive explosion occurs in the home, and a firefighter narrowly escapes in front of the fireball. Before the first take occurs, the video feed, which allows Pete Jones to watch from a nearby television monitor, cuts out. And despite the stuntman's jumping off the front porch of the house in front of a choreographed ball of flame and mildly burning his face, Biagi does not fully capture the moment on film! Why?
As Biagi would tell Pete, "the camera was pulled down with Aidan." What ensues is a debate as to whether to do a second take, which means putting the stuntman through this a second time. The stuntman agrees, but yet again, the camera covers Aidan's face, leaving the explosion, and the stuntman, in the background.
In Biagi's own words, "I prefer the more European side of things where you let the faces and characters tell the story, and you don't gloss it up so that it's a slick, stereotypical Hollywood film."
Are we to believe that Biagi never intended to capture this dangerous moment with his camera, and never told anyone of his intentions?
Pete Jones is effusive when he speaks of his admiration for Biagi's eye for frame composition, and he was probably justified in trusting his DP. But what got lost in this relationship was the DP's commitment to do right by his director, and to deliver the shots that Pete needed. Liberties were being taken, and at a moment in time where tens of thousands of dollars were being spent to deliver something completely different.
Suddenly, it feels as though there is mutiny on board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
