Frame & Reference Podcast - 81: “Devotion” DP Erik Messerschmidt

Episode Date: December 8, 2022

Season two finale time! On this weeks Kenny talks with cinematographer Erik Messerschmidt about the new film “Devotion.” Erik has had a very interesting career including work on series such as “Mindhunter”, “Legion”, “Fargo" and as the DP of “Mank” for which he won an Oscar. Enjoy the episode and happy holidays! Follow Kenny on Twitter @kwmcmillan and give him some feed back on the show! Frame & Reference is supported by Filmtools and ProVideo Coalition. Filmtools is the West Coasts leading supplier of film equipment. From cameras and lights to grip and expendables, Filmtools has you covered for all your film gear needs. Check out Filmtools.com for more. ProVideo Coalition is a top news and reviews site focusing on all things production and post. Check out ProVideoCoalition.com for the latest news coming out of the industry.

Hello and welcome to this, another episode of Frame and Reference. I'm your host, Kenny McMillan, and today on the season finale, Season 2 finale of Frame and Reference, we've got Eric Mezzershmidt, the DP of Devotion. You also know Eric from shooting Mank and Mine Hunter and his long career as a gaffer. And we talk about all of that. You know, Eric is very generous with his knowledge and his time and his perspective. And I certainly learned a lot. And it gave me kind of a weird sense of comfort. No, you know, I can't really explain it.

But it made me happy to be a DP and keep working. But not a lot of technical talk in this one. This is a lot more theory and stuff. So if you're into that sort of thing, you're going to love this. And like I said, this is the final episode of season two, wrapping up the year. I'm going to take a break until probably February. Mid-February is when we'll start getting more episodes, frame and reference. Because I'm not going to be around.

I'm going to be working. So look forward to that. Be sure to subscribe wherever you're listening to this. If you haven't, if you just found it. with this episode. And if you did just find this episode, go ahead and listen to the back catalog because it's all great. I have yet to have a dud of an interview. And, you know, if you are a listener, I'll just say this because it's, you know,

holidays and stuff, and I'm feeling the holiday feelings. But if you do listen to this, draw me an email, shoot me a DM or something, because I don't get a lot of feedback, you know, I don't know. Leave a review. I'll read those. But, you know, let me know what you like. Let me know what you don't like. Because going into season three, I'm going to change some things up.

And not a lot. It'll basically be the same podcast. But just thinking about those things. So that's it for me. I always like to keep these intros brief. That'll be something that changes to season three. Much briefer intros. Less vamping.

So anyway, I'll let you get to it. Please enjoy my conversation with Eric Messerschmitt ASC. actually speaking about things that you uh people probably ask you all the time um going back to your to your gaffing years what was it like working on bad grandpa i you know i did uh like three days of that movie where they actually lit stuff yeah but uh i guess i mean i only did three days on it and uh because it was apparently the only three days on it and uh because it was apparently the only three days where they needed to do any lighting. And my friend Jason McCormick was shooting it. And he called me up. And he said, hey, man, you want to go do this thing?

Is that bad? What? He said, yeah, it's Johnny Knoxville. It's going to dress up his grandpa. And I was like, okay, sure, I'm not doing anything. I'm available. So it was three days. And then I got the screen credit as, you know, as a guy had done the entire movie. You know, knowing Johnny Knoxville, they probably shot it for like three years, you know. But it, um, uh, I mean, we laughed a lot. It was hilarious. But it was, you know, we did like, I only did three days of the movie. Sure. So there, I assume there wasn't much interaction with Spike Jones then. I don't know that, you know, Spike wasn't there when we shot. I don't think. I've met Spike, but it wasn't, I don't think Spike. Spike may have stopped by, but I, I, no, yeah, not, not, not, not, not

but I didn't, I didn't assume you did, but it's always, uh, interesting to meet people who have met people that like I were sort of formative to me and one of those people was spike because of obviously there was like that director's box set with him and Chris Cunningham and Mark Romanek and all that but um with all the music the music videos but just like it didn't occur to me that you could make jackass and an Oscar winning film you know like I was like oh because as a kid I was more into the goofy shit and so the idea that like oh wait you can you can have fun and be serious and i was not serious i was like i guess i got to start watching whatever citizen kate you know i got to start right watching all right right

were you like that did did you kind of come to film uh with with a with a heavy film bias or did you come into because i i heard you talking about you kind of just like to the environment and the working environment more than anything yeah i mean i you know i i love movies but i love you know i'm an american kid i well you know my my mother is is is european She's Swedish, and we used to go to Europe all the time. And they, my parents would expose us to my brother and I to European cinema. But, you know, I'm like a kid of the 80s, man. You know, I mean, I loved Raiders of Los Arc and close encounters and, you know,

flight of the navigator, you know. I mean, I was like, I came from that generation. And those were the kinds of movies that excited me when I was 12, you know. And then as I got, and I love the movie, you know, I love the kind of magic of it, I think. and then when I got older and I sort of started studying film then I got a sense for what capital C cinema was right you know and and you know then I had a better appreciation for it and so I but I was already in I was sort of already in cinema at that point you know

I mean I was kind of like it was already something I wanted to do right I think yeah I didn't I didn't get into movies because I loved movies I mean I didn't you know I got into movies because I love making movies I think you know that's what that's yeah I feel kind of the same way I recently started to like especially over the pandemic and went on like a criterion purchasing spree and stuff like just because I was like man if I want to do you actually this is better as a question do you feel like obviously knowing the great films of the will inform you and make you a better filmmaker. But have you maybe met anybody or did you notice any of this where some people are kind of ignorant of the history of film and still succeeded? Totally, of course, yeah. I mean, you know, I think success,

people on the outside love to decide what success is. And it's like if you're an artist, we create a person, it's, you know, think it's um you have an entirely different perspective on what it means you know what it means to succeed i think you know and uh i mean to me to a large degree success is just that people continue to allow you to do this you know what i mean it's like that they you don't get thrown in movie jail and they you know someone calls you again you get to go back on you know you get to go back on the playground and and work more you know um i i think that that is like

like, you know, at least at least career success. I mean, I think, you know, if you're going to have a, like, you can definitely have a philosophical conversation. And it's, it's far more than just being able to continue to work. And, you know, such having family and meaning and friends and all, you know, the kind of big life stuff, obviously. But, yeah, I, I think that, I think what cinema literacy does for you is it gives you, it gives you a language to work in a nuanced way, but that's only really appreciated.

by very few number of people, you know, and, you know, it's most, most people I know that are working at a really high level, you know, in terms of their ability to use cinematic grammar, you know, kind of like the, you know, in the same way that, you know, the great writers of history worked, they weren't really appreciated by the masses, you know. And, and so it takes great filmmakers and great writers sometimes, I think, to recognize great filmmakers and great writers because they're working in such a nuanced way that the layman just doesn't quite, you know, they can't conceptualize what it is you're doing. And sometimes it's not that interesting. You know, sometimes it's like the technique to us is more interesting than the process or, you know, than the product ultimately. And, you know, you sort of done the story.

telling thing before so it's like well let me see let me try this in an interesting way and maybe you don't succeed but but your technique was interesting and that's what makes it interesting to you you know and i think as an artist creative person it's like sometimes it's it's just the act of doing you know it's like you make the move yourself sometimes i think you know i see filmmakers do that all the time yeah it's like uh you know everyone can enjoy a film but i i definitely have caught myself you know seeing a film with whoever and i see something i'm like that looks you know just absolutely flies over the average person's head. I'm like, oh, my God, that was so difficult.

Or like, especially in, you know, if I'll show people like snowboarding clips. And I'm like, look at this. And they're like, yeah, it's a backflip. I'm like, no, no, no, no, no. It was way harder. Yeah. I guess that is kind of the difficult thing is like you want to be me and I'll name drop Kana on the podcast.

Me and Canada, we're just talking about there's infinite, um, beginners, but only so many experts and you, and it's, it must be difficult to try to try to, maybe not for you, but especially like on the indie level, to make something that is both going to catch the eye of your peers or people you look up to, but also appease the masses, as it were. Yeah, I mean, you know, it's like I think, I think it's a lot like music, you know.

It's a lot like rock and roll, you know. I mean, it's look at, there are some metal guitarists that are probably far superior to any of your run of the mill. pop rock musicians, but they just don't get noticed because they're working in this genre that sort of, it only appeals a very slight few group of people. But in terms of their ability to play the instrument, they, you know, they exceed at this incredible level, you know, or jazz drummers or, you know, horn players in the orchestra, you know, could easily go and play

in in big rock orchestral bands or whatever and you know they choose to work in this niche and I think you know that's kind of a bit what you're talking about I guess you know to some degree I don't know I mean I you know I think for me a lot of it is like how do you keep the job interesting for yourself to you know where you're pushing yourself to do something so you're not just kind of taking the easy way out. You know, it's like, I think, I think people, and I also think that when I look at the filmmakers that I really admire,

they're kind of the ones that don't give a shit at all if people like their movies, you know? And especially, you know, you're in L.A., you're in L.A., and everybody is always sweating whether or not their movie is going to be successful because they need it to be successful to make another movie, you know? And that's, you know, I mean, I get it. It's a business.

makes sense. But in a way, you know, I think has a enormous, it's an enormous reason why European cinema tends to be so much more interesting because they don't have the same economic pressures that American filmmakers have, you know, for the movies to be commercially viable on all that stuff. And, you know, so you have, you know, you have filmmakers like Lars Vonjura out there that are just trying stuff. And, and, and, and they're able to take risks that are sometimes really interesting you know and and and and you don't you know you talk to those people you know directors like that and they don't they're like yeah i don't know i made this for myself and i hope people enjoy it i guess but you know if they don't like it you know whatever um you

know that's like such a luxury not very few of us could have you know can can afford yeah you know it's uh do you think that's changed at all the the sort of because i would say that the the the scuttle butt on the internet is always that like, oh, the, there's a certain type of film that just feels like it's been churned out, and there seems to be more of those than ever. From your perspective was like, because people always mention like the 70s and the 90s being like this great time for film where like directors were trusted to do whatever they wanted, and now it feels very, you know, clamped down maybe from that. from your end does that does that check out or is that freedom still kind of there even though

you just kind of said it's not I don't know no I think I mean look there's so much stuff being made now I mean there's way more movies being made so if you think about like in terms of opportunities afforded people it's like the opportunities are profound in a way I kind of think it's too easy you know I mean it's like you think about you know when they made the French connection it was hard to get that movie made man like they had to like they had to really work on it and refine it and talk about what it was and they had to cast it and they had to talk you know all this stuff had to come together to make that movie and it's amazing and and they gave them freedom to make the film but they were prepared you know and I think

you know now I mean look at streaming is great you know lots of people are given opportunities to make television shows I mean you look at just the number of television shows that Netflix turns out this turns out. But sometimes I watch stuff, I'm like, man, did you guys read the script before you shot it? Like, you know what I mean? Like, is it, it's, this isn't a finished idea. It does seem like there's a death of pre-production. Yeah, yeah, for sure.

And I think part of it is people are so excited to get their stuff done when they're given an opportunity. They say they're ready when they're not. And in a way, like when it was harder to get your movie made, you might refine the script for years you know yeah i think people are just you know they're like it's like seems like oh really you'll give me the money oh cool yeah totally ready i got you know

i mean it's like half of it's written you know and and for some reason studios are like oh you have you have an outline yeah great here's the money you know and then you see tv shows getting produced where they've got you know they have eight episodes scheduled but they have two episodes written and the writers are trying to write stuff and that's been going along for a long time I mean, when I was working television, I was like, that was kind of systemic problem, I think. But, but now it's like, man, don't we want to, like, have an idea, you know?

And so, yeah, I wish there was, honestly, like, you know, my colleagues are going to kill me for saying this. But I wish there was more oversight sometimes. I mean, I wish there was like, I don't know, guys, like, let's make sure that this is solid. But also, you know, you look at the movies of the 70s and also the movies in the 90s, the studio executive. at that time were filmmakers right you know um and you know they weren't MBAs so so it's it makes sense you know why stuff gets greenlit and why certain things get decided and why they you know they or there's a content war and all that stuff yeah man I mean you know exactly sure whatever I mean it's I get but um I think uh you know I think it's I think a lot of the reason

you know in particular the 70s those movies were made I mean clute I don't think you make clout these days. I don't think you make close encounters these days. I mean, you know, if you went to the close encounters, pitch meeting, and he said, yeah, and at the end, Richard Dreyfus gets on the ship and he leaves his family behind. No one would bring, like, that movie. You know what I mean?

Like, come on, you know. And, you know, all of us, including the studio executives, you're like, this is one of the best movies ever made. And you're like, yeah, in which movie now does the lead character get and abandon his family? Get on a spaceship, yeah, and abandon his family. It would never happen, you know? You know, the Guardians of the game. the galsity doesn't end with him getting on the ship and leave everyone who cares about, you know.

Thanks for the help. I'm out. Yeah, you know. Well, I guess if he found his mom, it'd be different. But, well, it does. I had heard you say once or twice that, like, you know, that a sort of egalitarian dictatorship is the correct move for a film set. And it's kind of, I don't know if I'm fully misquoting you there, but like it does seem, I've noticed in, whenever I've run projects, you know, I'm thinking like the, the ski club that I ran in college or like this

comedy show that I produce, the stand up comedy show that I produce weekly. It's like, especially the comedy show is like the whole past year we were doing all, everyone was just filling in where they needed to. And the show's great. We get the best comics in the world, but it just feels like there's no one staring it. Like we don't have an accountant. Like money just stays in a little bin and gets put under the beer and then you come back and um it does it's suddenly i'm i'm kind of realizing that same thing where it's like okay we don't have to be assholes but there should just be kind of a like here's the vision let's go from there and like make sure everyone knows exactly what they're supposed to do and kind of have a little bit of

oversight like you're saying yeah i don't i think probably what you heard me say was benevolent dictatorship not egalitarian i guess yeah i mean me trying to use two big words that there. It's okay. You know, look, it's, uh, it would be great if it's egalitarian, but it, I don't think a film set can function that way, quite frankly. I just, you know, I mean, I think government should, but I don't think that, um, film sets can. I mean, it's a little bit like being on a boat, you know, you kind of need a skipper. Skipper's got to have the final word, you know, and, and I think, I think vision is misused in a way because it implies that, it implies that the director is the soothsayer, you know, that they're the oracle.

And that's sometimes the case, but I don't think it's always the case. And in a way, it's like sometimes the most important thing for the director to be is just decisive, you know. And so if you surround yourself with creative people, but you elect one person. And in this, I mean, I mean, elect not in a democratic way, but in a, you know, you're taking a job and you know that this is the director. And they're the decider. And so, you know, all day, you know, the costume designer walks up and they've got two dresses. And they're like, this one or this one.

The director, you know, the worst thing is when the director is like, I don't know, what do you think? You know, the designer has already filtered this into a thing. These are my ideas. Now you pick one, you know, that's to me, like, that's directing. You know, it's like, oh, clearly that one. Okay, cool. You know, the problem arises when the designer or the DP or the production designer

or the, you know, whatever are like, They bring in two and they're like, but I really want this one. Right. And or they bring one. And then the director's like, that's not what I want. And then they're all hurt. And they're like, well, but I had my idea. You know, it's like, I don't think that's the job at all.

I mean, I think the job is like, okay, cool. I think there's like four places we can put the camera, you know. I think it should be here. And the director's like, no, man, we need to get this in the frame and then I'm going to cut to that. I'm going to cut to that. And then I don't know what we're going to do next. Oh, well, maybe we could do a POD. Oh, yeah, we'll do the PLB.

That's the conversation which happened, you know. They go 80 so they can go 20. Yeah, or whatever, you know, or you go 20 because they've given you 80. Sure. That's also okay, you know. And because that last 20% may be the most important part. You know what I mean? It's like that's the polish.

You know, sometimes, you know, there's, sometimes you're just lubricating a machiner, too. Yeah. You know. So I don't think, I don't think it's, I think it's really, really bad that,

you know, my experience anyway on a film set, the bad experiences have all come when the people in positions of power are not decisive. Sure. Oh, God, that applies to everything, right? Yeah, pretty much. And they're not. And they're not decisive in a reflexive way.

You know, it's like if you, if you understand your film, and that's kind of what I mean about prep and like people, you know, people setting out to make people, the one, you know, like when I go make a movie with David Fincher, he understands the film better than everybody in terms of his point of view. Right. So he's able to say, no, no, no, we're going to do this. I don't know.

I don't want to do that. I don't want to do this. Oh, yeah, let's do that. Oh, good. Yeah, great idea. You know, he's like, it's, it takes milliseconds to make the decisions. Right. You know, but it doesn't mean he's making every decision.

I mean, it doesn't mean that he's pre-visualized every choice. It just means he's able to, you know, it's a bracket and he's like, you know, leading it, leading the way. Well, and it also, you know, obviously, I'm sure you've experienced this, but like having some form of restraint is usually creatively more freeing than having ultimate or infinite options. And, you know, like if someone says, make me a movie. you're like, okay, but if they're like, make me a movie that does this, this, this looks like this, you're like, all right, I can work within those constraints and make something cool. I imagine having a director that's very decisive, as you're saying, like, is a form of creative restraint. You're not allowed to just do whatever you want, but you know the assignment, so to speak,

and can give those options, as you're saying, and maybe it's better, it's easier to work quicker and more efficiently that way. yeah i mean like every sport is interesting because it has rules you know yeah like whatever i what is it like golf you have 14 clubs in the bag and golf would be a lot easier if you could carry 18 clubs you know i used to play golf with this guy who's like 85 years old and he always had he had like three drive you know 35 clubs in his bag and and and he had six wedges or whatever you know but the but the restraint of the tools makes the game interesting. It makes it harder, but it also makes, you know, forces you to be decisive, but where you hit the ball. And it's the same in filmmaking, you know. Um, I think, you know,

I, and people, I think people mischaracterize or they conflate flexibility with ease of decision making, you know, and in my experience, it's like, uh, lots of equipment, certainly, never makes you faster and it doesn't give you better ideas you know i mean i mean equipment solves problems but it's a lot easier if the problems are are kind of pre-visualized predicted or you have an idea like okay i'm going to run into this i better have that in my bag you know you know as a cinematographer oftentimes you know you have a lot of stuff around because you can't predict the director and you don't know what they're going to do is you're like well i better have you know um so i you know a lot of that comes from, you know, or the schedule, you know, it's like, I don't know what time we're

going to shoot this. So, you know, if we're going to shoot this exterior and the sun might be there, it might be there or whatever, it's going to, it's going to change the tools I have to have around, you know, and it all, that all comes from the director, honestly, I think, you know, it's like if the director's like, hey, when does this look the best? I think it looks the best at 9 o'clock. Really? Yeah, I think so. Shoot me a picture. Show me. Here it is at 830, here it is at 9. Here is at 3 o'clock. Oh, fuck. I don't like the way it looked at 3 o'clock. Yeah, great. So, I mean, don't think we should do it at 9? Okay, what do we have do to do it at night while the actress be ready at seven you know everyone has to be there and then

we can only shoot for this period of time you have to do it in three shots or whatever and then we can go okay great well i love the way that looks okay if you like the way that looks but we can't shoot it at three then i need all this stuff right still won't look exactly like that oh well i don't want to spend money on that stuff i want to you know those are the kinds of conversations you have in an independent film sometimes but it's harder to have those conversations on a 90 million dollar movie where the actors are driving schedule or whatever you know you just solved a weird point of it. I just I was hit with like a wave of of relaxation there because I I've recently picked up a few like bigger gigs that I you know they're still very indie so I have to

come up with everything and I've been stressing about like fuck should I buy this should I rent this should I do because exactly what you're saying I just because I don't know it's very much hey show up and then we'll we'll get this sorted yeah so I just need now now I'm using you as a sounding board I just need to hit up the director and be like, all right, let's be way more specific about this. Yeah, I mean, I think it, look, it's, I think directors have to be specific, but it saves the money. Yeah. It gets the more stuff. I mean, if you've got so much money to make the movie, it's like, well, if I, if I need X amount of dollars, because I don't know where you're going to put the camera and you need dollars for the, for the costume designer, like, maybe we should.

just be decisive and then I won't eat all this stuff and give more money the cost of them. You know, um, I mean, and that's producing, I guess, you know, but,

but some, you know, I think we, as cinematographers often get very possessive about tools and, and sometimes it's because there just isn't enough. There's enough communication about what it is. And also there's enough understanding about what it is we do on the director's side for how their decision making affects our needs.

Um, and I think cinematographers need to be more vocal. and you know we have historically are sometimes very protective of our craft and we're like well no I need this stuff but you know I think it's like that's like the great thing about digital photography it's like look see how great this looks at nine in the morning when the song is over there and all this stuff yeah that's killer okay cool please shoot it this time of day you know yeah I actually did want to talk to you about uh I can't imagine you're the only person but I remember again doing research for Mank talking about or you

had been talking about how you've pretty much gone, let's say, away from meters and all that all together. And pretty much just lighting off a nice HDR monitor. And I was kind of wondering, does that make everyone feel more at ease? Because obviously, any set, there's always someone chimping, you know, looking over your shoulder at the little monitor. By being able to show them, I assume you're building a lot for whatever ahead of time. Just being like, that's what it looks like. Is that better for everyone or does that kind of make your job harder when now people can see and can make little comments or whatever? I mean, hopefully you're working with people that are that are trusting enough and appreciative of what it is you're doing to give you the

respect to let you do it. It doesn't mean that you don't or shouldn't get feedback. I mean, I think the problem is when you get feedback from 15 people, you know, it's like I will take feedback from the director all day long. you know no problem and it's like as far as i'm concerned it's the frame is their property the movie is there's if the movie is great we all look good if the movie is bad it's all on their back right so you know it's like if the director doesn't like the way it looks um you can have a conversation about that you have a discussion about that but you know i will i will take that i will take that seriously every time sometimes it's hard you know sometimes you're like no i don't

agree with you yeah that it's a discourse you know If you're getting feedback from the craft service guy about how it looks because they're looking over the monitor, then you sort of have to be like, hey, man, like, I, you know, with all due respect, this is sort of, this is our space and we're making these decisions. And I'm happy we have a conversation with you with over a cup coffee about what it is we're doing, what you think. I mean, in a way, you know, it's like, I want everybody's opinion, but they just have to be timed properly, you know. Right. it's fine I mean I don't think

I will take the pros of digital photography any day over the crimes of film yeah you know and I mean I think that it's for me the anxiety of dealing with

someone who who has questions about the choices we're making is far it's far less than the anxiety of wondering of whether or not it's in focus. Yeah. You know, and that's by no means like an indictment of film.

I mean, I think film is an incredible medium and it's fun to work in sometimes and for the right project, you know. But for me personally, it presents, it presents anxieties and frustrations that are sometimes not always the best depending on what project you're on, you know.

Would you say that, Because I've had this kind of swirling in my head based on, again, like, research of various films that you've worked on or, for instance, Venture's done, is obviously there's the, you know, production design and, and costuming and all that, and that's in front of the camera. Do you see the camera or your job as data collection in the moment and then art direction in post primarily these days versus, you know, especially with film, it was all kind of in the negative? I well I don't know that it's been in the negative since the digital intermediate has been around sure okay yeah I mean I don't think and I don't think you know Kodak wouldn't want me to make that would would want me to make that argument by the way because you know that's that's a that's a positive argument for film you know is that film captures this enormous uh dynamic range you know so as long as as long as we've had a rank

and we've been able to scan film and do a digital intermediate, I think that that's sort of been the case. And it's been a long time, I think, since any film has done a real

photochemical finish complete, you know? I mean, I don't know if Paul Thomas Anderson is doing photochemical finishes or not, I bet he probably is, but I don't know, like, if Likersh Pizza was a photochemical finish or if it was a D.I. But, um, but, you know, it's, uh, I think, you know, certainly the alchemy of cinematography in the time of the photochemical process was, is, is, is, was substantially

different than the job now, for sure, you know, um, but I think that, um, you know, I, I think the, the cinematographer's role in the image, uh, is somewhat the same. I mean, what you're doing in combination of lighting, filtration and lens is still ostensibly the same.

We just have more options than we did in 1991. You know, you know, it's the way you treated film stock, you know, whether you were push processing or pull processing or cross processing

or which film stocks you were using and how you were rating it, how you're exposing it. And, you know, that affects saturation and color and all that stuff. It's basically lutz. Yeah.

You know. so I don't think that the technique is different because the medium is different but in terms of the you know the choices you're making they're kind of the same ultimately you know but you know that being said I don't know I've said it a lot but I think that I just don't think the cinematographer is really

the person always that should get credit as the author of the visuals of the movie you know I mean it's it's such a It's so hard to see, you know, it's like, oh, well, I'm responsible for the image. It's like, well, you photographed it, but you didn't pick the wall color necessarily, you know, and you look at some of these, like, fantastic images from the history of cinema, you know, it's like that shot from three color, you know, the red trilogy of Kislauski, but Julia Benos with the, you know, with the bubble, she's blown the bubble in front of the red wall.

I mean, the cinematographer with some front light on it, put the camera there, and they made that choice, which was Kizelowski, but somebody made the decision to paint that wall red, And, you know, to me, it's less interesting about who is responsible and more interesting about about the, the melting pot of ideas that happens on the set between the actors, the director of script supervisor, the operator, the production designer, the on-set dresser, you know, the prop master, you know, all these people coming together and bringing, you know, this dress or this dress and the decision-making. But, you know, there is a huge filtration of making.

those of making those initial choices, you know, those initial selects. And you do that as a DP too. You know, you do it with color and light and all that stuff. It's a, but it's not a binary thing. Sure. I will say, I think I've quoted you saying that on at least seven podcasts, especially with production designers. You know, being the exact quote of the DP gets credit for what the production designer did.

So I guess it wasn't the exact quote. It was an abstraction of it. But that's been in whenever you said that first or whoever said it first, that's been in my head for a while where it kind of did make me as a DP feel a little more less anxious. You know, oh, I don't have to, I don't have to think of this as like, I'm in charge. of I think it I think it is a bit of a self-centered thing. We're like, oh, no, if the movie looks bad, it's my fault. It's like, no, it's your responsibility to use the language of lenses and composition and everyone else pitches in, you know? Well, I mean, it's also, you know, sometimes it's, you're just there, you're there protecting the director's sandbox half the time, too. You know, I mean, look, I've worked with directors. they want to pick every lens and they want to they want to place the camera you know um that's not always that fun you know see at least for me because i love the process of of camera direction you know

it's my favorite part i think um but but if you sign on and make a movie with a director and they want to they they they want to work that way it's your i think it's your responsibility to protect that you know and and figure out how it is that that you can help them in that process you know And sometimes it's like, you know, they are very just, you know, this lens right here. This is the shot. Okay. And then you see them working it out and you see the shot not working. And you know, if you have an idea about how to improve it, it's like, okay, well, if you

recognize the director struggling with something, then there's a great opportunity to come and say, hey, you want to try this, you know, and depending on your relationship and how open they are, they may say yes or they may say no, but, you know, I don't think, I think it's really and healthy to say, I'm the D.P. And so this is what I have to do, you know. Right. You want to be more Joe Thornton than Joe Sackick. Yeah. Do you watch hockey at all? Is that a reference for nobody? Yes. I played hockey as a kid. Okay. For people listening, Joe Thornton, all-time assist person, best assist her in the world. I'm also from San Jose, so that's very easy.

Go ducks. oh hell yeah all right dude it's so easy to get on the train and just go to the staple center from my house but the Amtrak also dumps you off in Anaheim and every once in a while I'm like man it'd be so easy to just like especially if the sharks are in town just Amtrak down to Anaheim and check those games out because my friend used to run the 50-50 raffles so she'd just give me tickets yeah are you from Anaheim no that's just your team No, I, no, no, I, I, um, you know, they're kind of my SoCal team, I guess. I mean, I love the Kings, I guess, I don't know, I'm not, I used to be a huge hockey fan when I was younger and, you know, I grew up in the East Coast, so it was, you know,

so it was the Bruins, but, um, sure, but, um, you know, my friends in Boston will probably kill me if they say I'm not a huge bruce fan anymore. I mean, I don't really, you know, I don't really follow hockey match anymore, but, yeah, it's, it's actually starting to get interesting. I feel like the I don't know it's a weird it's a weird thing that I've felt recently even though the sharks suck but hockey overall seems to be hitting this interesting like inflection point where everyone is just way too good so you know your kale macars and all that so it's it's um did did growing up doing sports did you uh I have this theory that the there's there's obviously a million kinds of two kinds of people but I feel like there's two kinds of people but I feel like there's two kinds of people that there's like athletes and then there's artists and they end up doing each other's jobs a lot. And so like I think of my friend Chase, who's a fine artist, but he was a professional motocross rider for Red Bull for, and that's how I met him for many years. And he applies that, I guess, ethos of like waking up every day and training, except in

training in his case is painting. I mean, he has hundreds of canvas. He's just constantly bombing through and iterating and stuff, which is very much an athletic mindset. Whereas I think most people, when they think of a painter, they think of like, oh, too tired to wake up today. Cigarette coffee, you know, I got to wait for inspiration. Did that athletic streak of you kind of pull over or do you kind of sit more in that artistic realm? Not to suggest you're depressed or whatever. No, it's fine. I'm perpetually, I'm perpetually depressed about what I'm doing. But I, I shouldn't say depressed. That's not right. That's the wrong.

I don't know what you mean I was a terrible athlete really I mean you know I I was a skier I was a decent skier and I was a ski racer and stuff but you know I was just never coordinated enough I mean I was always sort of like a kind of lanky skinny kid but I I was much more interested in theater

and art photography and painting you know but in a lot of the artistic endeavors and we love especially cinematographers I think we love to equate we love to conflate anyway you know painting with filmmaking or photography with

yeah you know they're all there's such solitary activities and and cinematography is not a solitary activity you know unless you're unless you're shooting wildlife

you know it's like you know if you're making narrative work you know television or films or making TV commercials or whatever you know sometimes it's like it's new and a hundred people you know um so it's it's much more like being on a soccer team um than it is you know that or you know or or a football team maybe where you're kind of you know you're more in a quarterback situation you're motivate people

and you have to you know you have to execute play um you know and uh then then then it is like the the act of painting you know and i think you know i think when i look at you know when i watch football in particular it's like i see all of this creativity and what's happening you know especially from the coaches standpoint but you know from the players obviously too in terms of the execution of these ideas um that's a lot more like filmmaking than painting i think um you know and you know we talk about painting because it's, you know, it's imagery and it's 2D imagery ostensibly and it's, you know,

and it's narrative, it's narrative ideas told through photos, you know, told through pictures and all that stuff, you know, but it's like this great combination of literature and, and photography and, and teamwork,

you know, it's people getting confused about the end result versus the creation of it. Oh, painting is exactly like photography because they're both pictures. Right. Yeah, exactly. You know, I mean, it's, and I, you know, the thing about filmmaking, I think, at least the thing about it that interests me is, um, is the inception of the idea is just the spark. And then you have to execute, you know, um, and, and that's not like photography at all, really, you know, I mean, unless you're, unless you're making, um,

Unless you're making a photograph, you know, there's like the difference between making a photograph and taking a photograph. Right. You know, if you're If you're Annie Liewicz and you're setting up a shot and you're or you're your, you're Gregory Crudson, you know, and you're like setting up a shot. And you're art directing a frame. Yeah, exactly. Someone like that. You know, that's, that's different than, you know, you know, street photography, obviously. And, you know, there's probably more similarities to, to, you know, the act of making a photograph to filmmaking than there is the act of taking a photograph, you know.

Right. And I think the same thing, the same thing goes with painting, you know, it's like the, there's the, you know, the painters that, uh, that conceptualize something in their head. And then they paint, it's entirely different than goes sitting, you know, setting up an easel in front of a lighthouse and painting a lighthouse. And then, you know, they're two very different, distinctly unique methods for the execution of an idea, you know, a visual idea. I did want to ask slight pivot, although hockey was a pretty aggressive pivot, you know, it's talking about going from like a gaffer to working on a Mind Hunter, for instance, or Manker, specifically with David Fincher's films. I was wondering if there's anything he does specifically. I suppose on a technical side, although I know that's not horrifically interesting, that helps you guys move efficiently and quickly while still maintaining a very cohesive

and beautiful look. Because I've noticed, like, in any behind the scenes photos I've seen, doesn't seem to be a lot of lighting, like, obviously there is a lot of lighting, but it's like not a lot on the floor that's just kind of is. And I'm fascinated by that because I feel like if people knew kind of. whatever restraint that is, it might help them in their work. Well, I think...

Positive in the restraint, you know. No, it, well, it is. It's, it's, it... Look, my, my, and it's, it's, it's my, and it's, it's, it's, it's not always a popular one, but it's my opinion that, that, that, that when you're lighting, um, it's, generally it's generally a solution to a problem that you presented yourself with you know and the more

lighting you have to do um and that's that's a that's a that's a very broad idea obviously you know if you're making chicago you know you have certain aesthetic requirements on it you know um but but i'm talking about things the things that exist outside the frame that you're sort of trying to fix you know so if you're wrapping key light or you're bringing in eye light or you're creating big walls of soft light outside of the camera, outside of the frame. In my practice, it's generally, that's a reaction to a situation I've been put in

or I've put myself in, you know? One of the things that David does, and David and I do together, is we go to the location or the set, and we talk about where we're going to put, how the scene is going to get staged. And those conversations sometimes are hours long, you know, and you do that with the actors, too. You know, it's like in mind, you know, the scenes where, in many cases, like eight hours long, or eight, you know, eight pages long, ten pages long.

So the scenes are elaborate and they're complex. So you have screen direction conversations to have, you're talking about, you know, the sequence saying and the shot design and, you know, the cutting pattern and all that stuff. and those those conversations um they they lead you to the lighting plan at least me you know and I think where a lot of people run into trouble is they either they try to make the lighting plan

direct direct to the camera I see a lot of cinematographers do that they go to the set and like great I'm going to put all this light through the windows it's like really have you even thought about if you and the director had a conversation about where you're going to put the camera yet You know, you used to have me a lot when I was a gaffer. I'd like to go do commercials with DPs. And commercial DPs do a lot because they're like, look at this, you know.

And it's like, yeah, but that there's like 17 shots in the storyboards and only one of them is here and like six of them are from the windows looking back, you know. And and then they spend the entire job trying to get the director to look towards the windows, you know. And, you know, what David and I do is we look at the set and we talk about where the cameras to go and not about where the cameras go on the first set up, but we're like all 12 setups are going to be. Yeah. And then it's like, oh, okay, cool. Then if we're going to put the camera in all these places, then I'll put the light there. And then I just need one light.

And then for the close up, I'll wrap it in a little bit or whatever. or he'll go, and he said, I know you're going to want to look towards these windows, right? Well, yeah, I think that would be good. He's like, okay, so we can put the table this way or this way? What would you prefer? If we put it this way, I know it'll be side lit for these pieces of coverage, but I need this close up here at this moment, it will be flatlit.

We put it like this. Half of it will be flat lit, and the other half will be backlit, but you only cut to the flat lit side once, but I don't want this guy to be silhouette, so I don't want you to have to put a bunch of fill light on his face. You know, that's coming, that's a conversation that David is having with me because he understands my job. understands how his choices affect my uh the his choices affect the image and how his choices affect

the choices i have to make you know so we're able to have those conversations really quickly you know um and and i think the thing is it's like you know david's blocking supports his aesthetic and makes my job a lot easier because because we're he he is he's playing 3d chess and he's recognizing how his choices are affecting the way the scenes go look, you know. Right. Yeah. I mean, it's also, you know, it's like, I think, you know, the second you light a close-up, you know, if you're in a wide shot, you have a, you know, you're in a wide master shot or whatever,

and then you jump to a close-up, you've added a bunch of beauty light to somebody's face. Right. um you know it can be really disruptive in the edit you know um oh sure yeah you know so i think it's like sometimes you know sometimes i i do that you know there's stuff in devotion like we lids her into swan when she when she turns around she's playing um elizabeth taylor and we did this one close-up of her where she turns into the frame and we lit that shot but we knew the order of how that was going to cut you know so i didn't have to worry about like oh we're going to be in a profile and then we're going to cut to this and there's going to be all this

light on her face that wasn't in the other shot or whatever you know I kind of I understood and jade and i had conversations about what the cutting pattern was going to be so i can make a cheat there you know you can't always do that and with david's movies you know the the the sequencing is often really complex so it's like he kind of have to be it to be pretty minimal yeah because you're going to put the camera in you're going to put the camera in in 30 places in the room you know so it's not like you don't also you you don't have time. You're not going to light it. You're not going to light it set 15 times either. You know, you sort of light it once or twice and that's it.

Yeah. I have two side questions and we can talk more about devotion because I got to see it at the Sony lot. So I got to like theoretically, that's the best version of it. But unless it's on IMAX somewhere. But, you know, ostensibly one of your largest bodies of work is on bones. and what's what that was you know a while ago but what kind of how is your work changed from doing that to what you've learned now working with for instance cronan with or who was the name the name that I mentioned earlier where did it go what was her name I said it to you Tammy Reiker yeah yeah yeah um yeah well you know I I was a gaffer for a long time I worked for a lot deep piece.

Right. And, you know, on phones, you know, I was young. When I got that job, I think it was 24. Which at the time, I mean, I guess it still probably is,

I don't know, at the time that was really rare to be that young and be gaffing a good-sized network TV show. So I was excited. I mean, I was like super into it.

And it was, you know, all the toys and all the resources of the big network TV show, but also all the anxiety. and stress of it, you know, that comes with that. And, you know, I mean, and network television, certainly at the time,

and I think to some degree now, was a game of, you got to make it look as good as you can, but the director has to make the day. Right. And there's a lot of people looking over your shoulder, and they, you know, there's a lot of politics for the DP to navigate because it's like, yeah, they want it to look good, but you're not doing any over time and you're not, you know,

Um, this is not a tour filmmaking. Right. And, and so, you know, the, um, sometimes the sets were elaborate. Sometimes they weren't. You know, we, we, you know, Gordon Lonsdale, who's shooting that show when I was there, um, was a real journeyman cameraman and a gentleman. And he was, uh, he, he could direct the camera very quickly and he could break down coverage, um, you know, screen direction and, uh, you know, very, very,

fast and sometimes you get directors in network television that are really checked in and really prepared and sometimes you don't and you know you get this whole range you know every eight days you get a new person who comes in the show and um i spent an enormous amount of my time on that show watching gordon do this with these directors and watch him uh you know break down screen direction watch a rehearsal once you know i mean you might get a blocking rehearsal once and then like okay great and put the camera here and very quickly say okay we're going to do this and we're going to do a second camera here, we'll do a third camera, get this close-up, and it'll turn around, and that'll develop into this two-shot,

and, you know, kind of quickly break the scene into the minimal amount of shots that are required to tell the story, you know, and that's very television. But, you know, many years of doing that, I absorbed that a lot. And then when I started working with David, I took a lot of those skills, you know, because we kind of work in the same way. We might make them, you know, we're not shooting on 11-1 Zoom, and, you know, and getting three sizes of everybody, we're, you know, we're shooting on primes, but the, but the screen direction and the kind of cutting sequence

is, is just a different use of, of, of the grammar that I had spent many years learning, you know, you know, thinking about screen direction, thinking about cutting pattern, thinking about pace and how, how long you might stay in a wide shot, how you get a shot to develop and when you're going to need a close-up and those kinds of conversations you know um so i you know i you know i wouldn't i wouldn't i wouldn't trade that experience for the world you know i mean the the lighting technique um on that show was very appropriate you know um it's not technique that i would use on mine hunter or on mag certainly or whatever but it was you know it was very appropriate from what it was that we were doing you know

and i think that's that's that's really important and people forget about that you know it's like Sometimes cinematographers that put in a position, you know, you take a job and you're, you're going to go shoot, you're going to shoot a children's movie or a Christmas movie or whatever, you know, and it has to be glamorous, it has to be happy, it has to be sad. You know, we always want to do these dark, you know, exotic, you know, aggressive looks, you know. And sometimes it's actually a lot harder to, to beauty light for people in a room, you know. And, and light it in such a way where you can work quickly and you're not moving 12-flies around every set of, you know. I mean, I look at like some of the work like, like, like Little Peterson did on Desperate Housewives. I mean, it's hard to do that, you know. It's hard.

It's a lot harder sometimes than doing something. Yeah. I was going to say, I interviewed Fernando Aureas, and he had just done Swamp Thing, and then kicked off and did Princess Switch 3. And he did prison break, too. So he did these two, like, really dark. And then they went, hey, how would you like to shoot a Vanessa Hudgens Christmas film? And he went, yeah. Yeah.

Yeah, you know, I mean, that's a thing. You know, sometimes it's like, you know, you get pigeonholing. You know, it's like cinematography would be able to do to do anything, you know, you should be able to do anything. You know, you should be able to light, you know, like Mariah Carey in one setup and, and, and, uh, and shoot Dahmer in the next, the next week or whatever, you know. Yeah. And I guess going back to what we were talking about at the beginning, having that, uh, deeper film now, which probably does help you make those decisions quicker instead of having to research, like, oh, how do you light something like this? Yeah. I mean, I'm definitely as a Gafferin watching, you know, and commercials for me, you know, the great thing about commercials is you're like, you're like.

once you get into the commercial world as a DPR as a Gaffer and you're doing a different job every week it's like okay great we're doing hair this week okay next week we're doing puppy chow okay next week we're doing and you may say oh man it's all a mayonnaise commercial to me it's all stupid but they all have their unique challenges that you're going to get presented with and um you know it's for me it was like such a great place to kind of learn you know oh absolutely you know and also like watching people that you know you want you went you know

did a bunch of laurel commercials you know there was like the guys that really special the directors that specialized in hair you know and like knowing when to over crank when to under crank to get that look and where you know where to put the lights so you get the glisten in the hair and all that stuff you know those those are these are these are tools that you know you may not shoot hair commercials all the time or you may not want to be the hair guy but uh but next time you got to shoot hair it's you're going to be really thankful you spent that week and a half shooting pantine you know whatever you know uh you know kicking first of all i uh i uh i've said a lot like

oh shit i really want to get into commercials and people like why it's like more stressful because like i do mostly corporate stuff now and you know it's relatively easy just make them look pretty interviews sound good great um sure But it's, I think it's mostly because of that, like you, the idea that you can learn so much from doing those wildly different jobs, potentially a lot intrigues me. So if anyone's listening, hire me. But going into devotion, the first thing I was struck, first of all, I spoke to Billy Fox a couple days ago. And I guess we'll start there. Like, what was your relationship?

He gave me his side, but what was your relationship with him like? Well, Billy was great. I mean, you know, we did a lot of pre-vids on devotion. And we did, and a lot of it was because we had an aerial unit shooting stuff in Washington State. We had first unit shooting stuff in Savannah, Georgia. We had first unit then shooting Buck interiors in Atlanta, Georgia on stage. and all of those things were often shot like months apart. So all of us, Billy included, I think, felt that we needed a, a roadmap or, you know, a plan for how we were going to put these scenes together.

And a lot of it was just making sure, in the case of devotion, the audience understood where everybody was in relation to each other. You know, there's a sequence at the end of the movie where the sky is crashing. and it's and the airplanes are different different elevations and they're all looking at each other and it's like you can't you know you don't want someone looking left at the airplane and then the other person looks left and they're supposed to be looking for the right you know I mean those are simple things to solve in a in a dining room it's a whole different thing when you when you have to send an aerial unit out you need a POB of the plane going left to right and then you need the other side POV going right to left well you've now established that those planes are here and so like all of that stop has to kind of be disgusting against, you know, especially if you shoot the arials first. So, you know, um, Billy and J.D. and I talked a lot about how we were going to structure these scenes. And, um, you know, it's, it's, I like, I find that, that cinematography, I often find that I'm, uh, I feel the closest to the editor at the end of the movie. You know, like during the, during the course of, during the course of production,

I feel the closest to the production designer probably I mean hopefully the director but after the director you know that usually the production designer sometimes costume design but you know sometimes it's the first AD you know but but you know like while we're shooting a movie but to be honest with you when I when I think back about my experience of making a movie it's it I often think about the conversations I've had with the editor either before

after or during you know you know it's the same thing when we did make and we were looking at cuts with Kirk Baxter I mean you know so I love getting invited into the editing room and I don't by no means expect to be invited but it's you know it's lovely to go in and see how how they're making it and you know it's a lot like you know it's a lot like cooking you know In cinematography, you're making the sausage, and then you, you know, you hang it up and you carry it for a little while, and then someone else takes it and they have to cook it. And you never really know if it's any good, you know, you haven't tasted the sausage until it's cooked.

And so, you know, if the editor understands how you've made, how you seasoned the meat, they'll have a much better idea about how they're going to cook it. You know what I mean? absolutely so so yeah i don't know i mean i i hope billy had a good experience you know i think he did no he did and uh he he he also yeah he kind of echoed what you said like it was a it was an interesting um collaborative relationship i'm sure he's had it with others but he it's a written article it actually just went up this morning if you want to check it out on pro video but uh but one thing that i uh asked him about was if he had been given like a cdl or a lot or whatever and he

had mentioned that like even though obviously he's not the colorist but he had mentioned that the film didn't really look any different after it left his hands and hit the theaters than it did how you were from what you got on set um and i was wondering is that uh that that doesn't seem very common i feel like things get you know manhandled the death in the di a lot of times these days so how did you how did you manage it how were you able to How are you able to get that? I don't, I, I, I, I, I think, look, I think that you should progressively do less, you know, at least in the image pipeline, you know, it's like, so the, you know, the bold, the big choices,

um, in my opinion, should never be made in the grade. They should be made in production design, you know, so if you want, you, you know, you'll make an Ozark and you want it to be teal put put the actors in in shoot it in overcast light put the actors in cool tones put you know don't put red and and and yellow and you know put a bunch you know use pastels and limited color palette on the set and then you won't have to do very much grading right you know don't shoot it in in bright sunlight and then desaturated you know it all looks graded to me and not I'm not specifically talking about Ozark I'm just using example because of the color of the show you know um but uh so so you know for us on on devotion

it was the the the early color palette conversations um were with you know with win thomas the production design and you know and then and then deirdre the costume designer and we talked about what the you know and it wasn't like coming from me it was a conversation that was coming from jd Dillard about how he wanted his movie to look. You know, he wanted it to be khaki. He wanted it to be green. You know, he wanted it to have color contrast, but not feel like, you know, he didn't want the desaturated war movie look.

Right. You know. And so then, you know, the, those choices were made primarily in, in what was in front of the camera, you know, in terms of the big choices. And then we made lighting choices And we had one lot We had one show lot And it basically

It introduced a little bit of color in the shadows Coolness And it took the highlights and the midtones A little yellow Kind of a split tone thing And it desaturated red And it didn't touch the gamma at all And I don't really like to grade

On the set I don't like that process at all I think it's, I think that it confuses the colorist in the end and I've never seen a colorist pull up a CDL that, you know, DIT did. You know, it just doesn't happen. You don't go to company three and, you know, colors just isn't like, oh, let's see what the DIT did. You know, it never happened. Hey, Jill, I have a better idea than you. Yeah, exactly.

You know, so they, so, you know, I don't like to confuse it then, you know, and then you're like, well, I got the Dailies to look this way because I introduced all these secondaries that you don't have access to now. Now you're going to spend all of our color correction time trying to get it to look like dailies. It's like, well, let's just get the dailies to look like it because we're going to use one life. So I do, I generally do something like that.

And so we did a single lot on the movie. And then in the end, you know, the grading was really just about chasing visual effects. And, you know, Ian the colorist was having daily conversations from visual effects artists and making sure that the set extensions were in the right palette to match with the foreground and all that stuff in terms of what we were doing with the lut because they're working in a they're working with an ex-r and they don't always have the show lot you know right um so if you're doing a lot of set extension you've been really cautious about what the foreground tones are then you want you know you want out for the rotoscope mat line whatever they're putting in you want the similar tones in those so that when you when you then grade it it looks right you know right um So there's that there's that conversation is happening and and yeah, Billy's right.

I mean, I think if you look at some of the skills, you know, like the daily's pulls, they look like the movie, you know. Weirdly enough, they sent me a like a behind the scene. Well, they sent me a bunch of stuff, but there's this one like eight minute behind the scenes video that I saw. And yeah, like this, the whoever the BTS videographer was and like the photographers don't look much different than the film like a little bit. But it was surprising how well you'd locked in the look. And a lot of times with very little vision, at least in the shots I saw, not much lighting gear. Same thing we were saying about, you know, Mind Hunter or whatever. It's not a ton of lighting.

Yeah, I mean, I sort of do, you know, I kind of light reluctantly, you know, it's like lighting doesn't excite, you know. I mean, I think some people are like, oh, great, what do I do first? You know, it's like, I'm always like, what do I turn off or what can I get out of here, you know? I want to do as little as possible. Well, and I hope then you'll take this as a larger compliment. I didn't know I was going to interview you when I saw the interview you. When I saw the film, I was going to interview Billy.

And so I was trying to pay attention to sort of editing stuff. But obviously, I'm a cinematographer and I'm watching it. And it's the film is so well composed. I kept on getting struck by how well, like each frame was just very beautifully composed. And I'm wondering if that was a JD thing or was that a you thing or obviously some hybrid of them. But I really wanted to make sure I gave you that compliment that like it's a very. Oh, thank you. Yeah, the compositions were lovely.

No, thank you. Thank you so much. I mean, we, you know, JD wanted to make the movie in kind of a 90 style, you know, kind of like big movie epic American style. but you know told obviously with modern tools and but and I think I think part of why he wanted to do that was it you know it's it's a throwback to the movies of our childhood you know I'm a little older than JD but we sort of we reacted very much to the same movies that that that we were excited about that were kind of big epic American films and and also you know he wanted the the the cutting pattern and the structure of the movie to be succinct enough so as not to distract from the performances. And we talked about that a lot. You know, it's like sometimes, you know, for me anyway, like sometimes a cut can take me

totally out of a scene. And so I think things like, things like continuity and screen direction matter and compositional, you know, equality in terms of like how, you know, how much a, you know, how much a person And size matches and focal length matches and all that stuff. That's tedious way to make a movie. But the result is you get a really buttery cut, you know, when you're having a conversation between two people. And a lot of the movie is a conversation between two people.

So, yeah, way less action than I thought in this film. It's like, yeah, I think Billy said it's like, I think he said 70, 30, 70% drama, 30% action. And I was like, it's a really wonderful surprise. If I guess if you don't really pay. attention to. I went in pretty cold. So, you know, I was like, oh, all right, cool. Well, you know, I mean, I think it's like we, you know, the script is, it read as a drama. You know, anyone who read the script and thought it was an action movie just didn't read the script, you know. I mean,

it's, it's, it's drama. There's action sequences and it's sort, but it's sort of the catalyst for what these characters are going through. It's the background for, you know. And I think that trailer did you guys dirty a little bit. Trailer's very action. Well, it's, I mean, look, it's, it's, it's tricky you know the movie's coming on the tail end of top gun and obviously top gun is a spectacle film and it's remarkable what they did and you know i think it's like a it's real testament to um to all of those guys in terms of what you know what they were trying to it's trying to trying to trying to do you know just with our movie we weren't trying to do any of that stuff really you know um it's totally different film yeah well and i want to get back to the composition thing because i did interrupt you but i will say i having seen top gun recently and then seeing that movie. I guess it was just in my head that you shot the in cockpit stuff live like they did, which I'm hoping is a compliment because the volume work you did looks. I couldn't tell. Like obviously that's maybe a bunch of people are like you're an idiot if it was obvious. But like it I didn't my first thought was live, not volume. Um, okay, so

then we'll talk about volume. But yeah, finish, finish your thought about J. your interaction with JD and like the composition of how it wanted to be a kind of a 90s. Well, no, it was just we, you know, we wanted, so we, you know, we asked the actors, you know, the thing about nice, you can, you know, my opinion, look, is you can, if you have a good operator and operator has, has compositional sensibility, they will find a great frame. The problem is, is if the, the operator spends half the shot finding the frame, you only get a great composition for 30% of it. And there's no way of guaranteeing that that portion is going to end up in the cut. You know, and you end up with this thing where the operator is sort of always fixing

the frame. And they're like, and that happens normally because you don't know where the actor's going to go. You know, so operators are framing for the actor. They're not framing for the background. And composition is about the combination about, in my opinion, about the foreground elements and how they interact and line up with the background element. So in order to like get a, a composition with intent, you have to you have to not only predict, but kind of pre-visualize where that person's going to be in relationship. You know, you have a camera, you know, the background,

which, you know, either has perspective or it's flat or it's, you know, it's layers or whatever it is you're doing and the person and, you know, you have to put the camera in a place where they all complement each other, you know? So in order for it to work, the actors have to, to be in the same place at the time. Yeah. You know, and it's technical way to work, and it requires participation from the actors, and it's not always possible, you know, and it has to come from the director, and

the actors have to be on board, and you have to say, hey, listen, we're going to rehearse the scene, I'm going to figure out where you're going to be, you're going to stand there, okay, if you're going to be there, then we're going to put the camera here, and it doesn't mean you have to tell them where to stand. Right. You just need to know, you know. and and if the actors if you're making a kind of very frenetic

movie where they're like look man I need freedom I can't I'm in an argument and I'm not sure where I'm going to land you know and then you also put the camera on a dolly or a slider and you're always moving it it has a very different aesthetic result and you don't get the result that we had in devotion where

someone's like you know they're here you know there's like this corner here and I'm there and it's like you have this you know thing that's that's obviously done intentionally way. But it, you know, it restricts performance and it restricts, you know, you have to shoot on prime lenses and you have to sort of define where you can put the camera and stuff. It affects the process by which you make the movie in an enormous way. When you can debate, you know,

people like Hitchcock and Truffel had that conversation, you know, for days. I actually just bought that Hitchcock book by Traffant, is it? Truffel, yeah. Yeah, Truffel. It's funny. It's the most important. written on cinema in the history of cinema I think great purchase for me then because I went to go see I went to see Penn Gillette did a book signing and like read from his new book random and then I was walking through there's this enormous Barnes and Noble at the grove so I went down to like the film section and I was like oh get that you know it's great great pull for me it's amazing it's amazing yeah it's actually funny about you mentioned framing back because that's

That's one of my Mank notes. I have more papers than that, I swear. But it's just framing backgrounds and quotes. You must have said something along the lines. Because that's always fascinated me because I think I'm bad at that. I think I'm bad at framing a background. I'm good at framing a face. Sure.

Or historically, I've gotten better because I've been thinking about it. But does that strike any bells? That's a terrible question. Well, I mean, I think we, I, we. you know, look, a shot is, um, a shot is kind of what I said, you know, it's the, it's the relationship between the foreground, you know, we're taking three dimensions and we're distilling it into two dimensions. Yeah. So your, you know, you take a lens and you're deciding how much compression you're going to apply and how much of the background you need

to see and, you know, you know, obviously on a wide lens closer, you see more of the background and that, you know, um, and, uh, so for, you know, I think, um look it's easy it's easy to put um put a long lens on the camera and follow the actors around the room and and you know you can shoot a wide shot you know a kind of classic network american television you shoot a wide shot you say oh look they're in the bedroom you know and then you put the camera on the dolly and then you you you know you give the operator a 12 to 1 and you say look man i just need two sizes just shoot the interaction and you know and if you do that and you cover performance that that's fine it's totally acceptable and but i think you put an enormous amount of weight

on the power of the script and the actors because you're just recording the interaction you know and their relationship in the room and their relationship to each other and how they interact with you know if you're if you're excluding the foreground person you're not getting it over the shoulder you're not getting context to what's happening in the room you don't have an understanding of how far away they are from the wall or whatever how close they are to each other I think you're losing an enormous amount of the drama Right

And so if you If you include context of where they are in the room And instead of Reframing when they focus Just pulling folk Reframing when they lean forward Putting in the camera where they lean in You know

It's like you know If someone's in profile and they lean forward and you frame forward, it's a completely different effect on the audience than if you're in a close-up and they lean in. Well, in order to get a close-up where they lean in, you have to put the camera in a place where that's going to work, you know, and sometimes it doesn't work for the whole scene. You know, it's like that shot in, you know,

the opening of rear window when Grace Kelly leans in, you can't get on an 11-1 zoom on a dolly off the camera. You get an over the shoulder, you know, and he leans in sort of lives like, you still cover the scene, but the scene wouldn't be the same. Right. You know, and so, you know, when we talk about framing backgrounds, we're really talking about directing the camera and thinking about, okay, well,

what's important in the scene beyond what's being said, you know, it's like, it goes for blocking. It's like, okay, if the person's going to be there, and they're in front of the bookcase, maybe they're in front of the bookcase because there's something in, there's subtext in the scene that's relative. And I'm not talking about like, oh, it's buried deep in the text. It's like it has to do with the way the scene is developing, you know? Right. Because I remember in devotion, there's that scene where, shit, the main character. Yeah, yeah, he's talking to his wife and he's just backed into that corner in the kitchen.

And that was, I just remember going, oh, that's good. that was my little DP blocking brain went okay got it well you know but in the case of that it's like you know that when we did that scene you know JD brought the actors in and they ran it it wasn't like you know I certainly didn't say oh Jonathan should be in the corner you know right they ran it three three or four times and you know

once for them seated on the table and Jonathan I think it was probably Jonathan was like what if we tried in the corner like can I start here you know and and everyone's like yeah man And then you can totally, you know, try it, sure. And then you run it a few ways. And then I say, okay, cool. I'm going to do that.

Then I'm just going to light it with this practical. And we're going to leave you dark in the corner, you know, because you're in the corner, you know, it helps, you know, in my opinion, it felt like it helped the scene. And everyone went with that idea, you know. It was obviously there's a lot of scenes that stand out. But that one in particular, it was especially because it's a very, you know, important moment, important conversation. But, yeah, it was very well done there from everything.

I know I got to let you go here I did briefly want to just because it's the new thing and it's interesting I wanted to ask about your experience using the volume because had you done that before I had you know we had done I done a lot of all the driving work well it wasn't technically volume but all the going back to mine hunter we've done all the driving work with LED and and and um you know So, you know, I'd done a lot of it. And then, you know, I'd done commercials as a gaffro with Claudia Miranda back in the day with rear projection. And, you know, when we did Bones, we did all the driving on rear projection. So it wasn't like, you know, and I think, you know, it's a funny. Yeah, I find the whole volume conversation really hilarious because, you know, go back to like, well, you go back to catch a thief.

I mean, Hitchcock did it. And it was in 1957 or whenever that movie was made. You know, I mean, it's like, he went and he. shot he went to monaco they shot all the plates for the shots he wanted to shoot in the car and then they went on stage and they set up you know a carbon arc projector and they put um grace kelly in the car and they you know and they shot the same shot and they put and it's like you know look it has technical limitations but it was 60 years ago you know and and it's it's it's ostensibly the same idea and then um and we and you know look at lassey same idea painted backdrop right

right um we didn't go to green screen because i mean we went to green screen in the case of uh star wars because you couldn't shoot in space right yeah but but we didn't put green screens outside windows because the quality of backings wasn't really there we started put green screens outside windows because people didn't want to commit right you know it's like oh well just just put the green screen outside the car because we don't want to shoot the plates in advance you know like it's a lot of work to do it the hitchcock way and go out there and say we're going to put the camera here so put a you know there's 65 millimeter vista vision camera here on the car and we shoot this profile plate and then shoot another one you know um so so we you know for this period of 30 years

in the film business we went to blue and green screen comps and now everyone is talking about the LED volume like it's this new idea and it's like no guys it's like the same thing that that Hitchcock was doing in the 50s you know it's just the display is a different idea you know and then you hear all these people saying oh my god but then I have to shoot the plates early and it's like yeah guys and that's why we all went to blue screen you know it's obviously a better way to do it if you do the homework you know but it's not it's not at all in terms of execution, a new idea

really, you know? There's a lot of people behind computer screens that are delivering you the content, but, you know, they're basically projectionists, you know?

Yeah. I mean, it's different in the case of, you know, Unreal Engine where you have the model of the environments in 3D, obviously,

and all that stuff. But, you know, I had a good experience on the volume. We couldn't, we, we, we wanted to,

there's the opening sequence, the opening airplane sequence in the movie where they're flying in the bearcats, it was shot for real. Oh, cool. And it was shot for real because we had a trainer aircraft. It was a good match to the bear cat in terms of the cockpit and the, you know, the control surfaces and the wings and stuff to the bear cat, but it was a two-seater. So we could put a pilot in the front and there was room for the camera and we put the actors

in the back. So we had that airplane and we could and we could put the actors in it. But it's hard, you know, the actors go up. They have to direct themselves. You have to tell them what direction to look and you don't know what takes they've done. There's no way to see the image on the grid. Excuse me.

You know, they take off and they fly 100 kilometers to the location, you know. And they have to say, okay, action, and now I'm going to do it. And then you're going to fly this route. And then, you know, and you kind of hope that their relationship to the background is correct for the story because they're thinking about acting and they're thinking about their eye line and thinking about the screen direction.

They're thinking about all these things you've told them on the ground. But then they're also doing loose. and they're, you know, they're feeling it in their stomach. And, you know, it has, you're asking a lot. Right. And so, but we did it for real. And then we got to put it, you know, the planes came back. We're like, okay, good.

It's in focus. It's exposed. It's okay. And you watch it. And you're like, okay, this works. Did you guys roll the camera? Did you hit the red button? We told you to hit, you know what I mean?

But, you had like, you know, 11. pages in the cockpit and it wasn't even if we had the airports it wasn't possible for us and in the case of the court yeah I mean well you know they're really and it had it had to happen at dusk and you know if you've ever flown a vintage or you've been involved in anyone who flies you know flies vintage propeller driven aircraft it's like the the the weather the ceiling the visibility conditions and the reliability of the airplane all take precedence for obvious reasons over the light, you know, and the sun position. And we had scenes that had to be shot at dusk, and we needed to see the setting sun, and we need to feel all that. And, you know, all of that's

beside the point. We didn't have a two-seater course there. So we couldn't, we couldn't do it for real, you know. We would have had to build the airplane. So, yeah, we saw, plates and we did it on a volume and you know it it proved to be I think really successful and it was great for a lot of reasons you know one of the things that was wonderful about it is is you're able to get all of the subtleties in in the glass canopy that you don't get if it's digital you know and it's you know when I've shot in glass canopies or cars before you know what I've what I found most of the time is they they rotoscope that glass out

they kind of track the reflections and they put cglass back in it and they replicate the reflections that never quite looks real you know right and so it uh you know that that was that was enormous but the other thing that's sort of completely not image related but has a huge effect on movies it meant that that billy the editor and and jd in the editing room had complete basically completed shots to cut them right so you know it's it's hard i think uh when you're cutting a movie and you're trying to you're trying to craft emotion and you're going from one person in a plane with a green screen behind them to another person in playing with a green screen behind you have to imagine that they're in a dive and now they're in a bank and all this stuff and you

don't have context and and you know so they're able to they're able to cut those movies into the assembly and then show them to Sony or show them to test audiences without doing a bunch of visual effects work, the audience would say, oh, yeah, that's, you know, they immediately understand what's happening on it in the scene, you know. It's funny. I mean, I think devotion now is, you know, people assume there's a lot more visual effects in the movie than there are. I mean, reality, it's like pretty much, you know, we had four corsairs the whole time.

So if there's four corsairs in the movie, they're four real corsairs. If there's five corsairs in the movie, there's four real ones and one, one that's been duplicated, you know, it's not like you're looking at, at, at, at, six completely ct planes ever you know um it's i think it's just uh i think billy mentioned that like he he would get some of that volume footage back and he'd be like oh wow this is one of the shots they got for real and then like a film a practical light or a film light would like come through behind the cockpit and you'd be what the fuck yeah we worked hard on it you know but i mean one of the things we did is we made a rule that we would never put the camera in a place you

couldn't actually put the camera if the plane was real course you know I mean, that's one of the, you know, it's like, I think you, you know, you watch Tidu-Tadu-Bang, and you see them in the flying car and they're, you know, it's obviously a flying car in front of a backing because the camera is like moving around, like it's on a dolly around this air, you know, around this flying car. Yeah. You know, the audience knows you can't do that. So we, we decided we'd never put the camera in a place. They wouldn't, you know, where it would give away the car trick. Yeah, of course. I've kept you longer than I should have, but, so I'll let you go.

But this has been a wonderful conversation. I hope I can have you back. But I end the podcast with the same two questions for everyone. And they are as follows. One, if you're going to put your programming a double feature with devotion and another film, what is the other film? Oh, God. Devotion and another film. It can complement.

It can contrast. It's totally up to you. I think, um, maybe, um, maybe, um, I've, um, I've, I've said this a million times. Oh, go ahead. I was going to say Midnight Cowboy. Okay. Yeah. But I think that's, I think that's too much. I don't know.

I mean, I think, uh, Mississippi Burning maybe. Okay. You know, I will say, and I've, I've used this example a million times, but it's, it's just a funny one. Uh, when I asked Cronin West and I interviewed him for, uh, being the Ricardo's, he immediately said Alien versus Predator. so midnight cowboy works

I am Jeff has always been more clever than I am yeah he's a fun guy to talk to second question everyone always asks everyone what's the best piece of advice you got what's the worst piece of advice you got it's all about the script

I think that I think you want me to elaborate why I think I think I think that judging a script is the hardest thing to do and it's clear if you watch the movies that get greenlit

and the movies that succeed every year. You know, I mean, it's like judging a, judging a movie by the script, judging which movies to make by the script is hard for anyone and it's hard for people who just read scripts all day long and decide which movies to green light.

I think, and I think the script is a, the script is a servant suggestion and the movie gets made the combination of people that are involved, you know, the actors, the, you know, the kind of visual, you know, creative people, you know,

not that actors aren't creative, but, you know, the production designer, costume designer, DP, her makeup, you know, and obviously the director. And so, you know, if you read the script, you don't immediately react to it, it's, I think that that's a mistake. I think the thing to do is to, like,

read the script. And if there's something you see in there that's interesting, but it doesn't speak to immediately then maybe the director has a point of view that's going to change your mind you know and I think that I think a lot of people make the mistake of they think the first thing they should do

is read the script and I would actually prefer in some cases if I have a you know somebody is interested in working with me for example I'd rather talk the director first and then read the script so I have context

because if the director has an idea about how they want to make the movie, that to me is far more interesting to then apply to how I read the script. I'd rather not read the script cold, you know. That makes total sense. So I think that's the worst advice. And I think it's, unfortunately, it's advice that huge portion of Hollywood takes is the first thing they all do is read the script.

You know, I want to know who's involved. I'm wondering who's making the creative decisions. Yeah. that totally makes sense because like the sometimes for sure i've seen it happen but oftentimes the writer is not on set and is not making decisions so it's not necessarily applicable to your to your work yeah exactly i mean yeah i mean it has you know and i also think that it's very difficult to um it's it's very difficult to understand subtext without watching a script performed because the way screenplays are written you know and to me film

what makes movies interesting what makes an individual scene interesting and then and then the film interesting is the subtext I mean look I just saw Bardo I think Bardo is spectacular and Bardo is a complicated movie but I I guarantee you reading that script you'd be like what the fuck is this but then you see you see what he did and you see how the movie comes together and you know and then you say okay well there's all of this other stuff happening in the film that was never on the page um so it by no means is it like am i suggesting the screenwriting isn't a incredibly important thing i just find it very difficult to judge the value of the movie from the screenplay you know yeah i mean no one this is a corny ass example but like no one

reads shakespeare you want to see it performed yeah Yeah, exactly, exactly, you know. And I'm sure Tenet is a tough script to read. Yeah, of course, you know, sure. I mean, it's also, you know, I think for me anyway, I don't have a lot of trust in myself in terms of being able to assess a scene in script form. You know, I just don't.

I think that's an incredibly unique skill. And it's, you know, when I watch actors perform, scenes that I've read. Sometimes I read scenes. I'm like, man, this doesn't make any sense. And then I see it, you know, on its feet with great performers. It happened on Mind Hunter a lot. You know, I see the actors performance. I was like, man, I didn't. I had no idea what was happening in this scene until I saw it get read. You know, and sometimes I think the director does. And sometimes I think you see the scene take shape and you see interactions between people, you know, between the actors. They're looking at each other at certain lines. You're like,

why are you reacting that way? Oh, well, I should be afraid at this moment, right? Oh, yeah, you should be afraid at that moment. Okay. we should make sure we get a closer for that moment so we can you know what i mean it's like yeah that might not be in a script at all um but it might be the central pivot of the of the scene and it might it entirely have been the writer's intent um because they they applied subtext in that the actor felt but that i completely missed you know um happens to me all the time yeah did you stupid side question did you ever watch fringe i did i did i you know i i watched fringe after Fringe was on because Anna Torv had been in Fringe.

And so I was getting ready to do Mindhunter and I wanted to see Anna. Yeah, I love that show. I got all the Blu-ray. Well, not all in their expensive shit, but I love that show so much. That was like modern day X-Files, but like I could go on about Fringe. But yeah, it's a really good show. Well, I'll let you go, man. Thank you so much for spending the time with me.

I had a lot of fun and I hope you did too. You bet, man. Yeah, absolutely. when you're done when you're on the press tour for this one you're working on hopefully we can have you back and talk a little more you got it sounds good awesome take care man all right cheers bye bye frame and reference is an owlbot production it's produced and edited by me Kenny McMillan and distributed by pro video coalition our theme song is written and performed by mark pelly and the eth-at-ar matbox logo was designed by Nate Truax of Truax branding company

You can read or watch the podcast you've just heard by going to provideocoolition.com or YouTube.com slash owlbot respectively. And as always, thanks for listening.