Interview: “Shaun the Sheep” Co-Writer/Director Richard Starzak
Posted on November 23, 2015 at 3:51 pm
Richard Starzak and Mark Burton wrote and directed the adorable “Shaun the Sheep,” and it was a lot of fun to talk to him about making a stop-motion animation movie with no words. The DVD/Blu-Ray, which will be available November 24, 2015, has a behind-the-scenes featurette showing Starzak and Burton acting out some of the movements for the animators “to get the timing right for comedy” and working with actor Justin Fletcher on recording some of the non-verbal sounds. The idea of having the mouths of the sheep go off to the side of their snouts came from one of the storyboard artists “just to indicate that the character was smiling and we thought it was funny so we kept it there. Some people think it looks very strange and some people kind of don’t worry about it.”
The vehicles in the film are as individual as the human and animal characters. “We tried to give everything a bit of personality.”
It is a painstaking, very slow process to move each of the characters very slightly, take a picture, and then move it again. “We aim for about two seconds per animator a day so in a week we’re expected to do about ten seconds on average. That’s times sixteen animators so it would be two or three minutes of animation during the week…We use mainly the live action video to time how long we need for any particular shot. It’s a bit of jigsaw puzzle. You have to fit the film into a certain amount of time but it’s kind of trial and error. We shoot and then we might adjust them after we have shot them, we might take the odd frame out here and there, we’ll double up the odd frame so it is constantly being reassessed. I suppose the film ended up a few minutes longer than we intended but that’s fine; the timing was worthwhile so we were happy with that.”
Working without dialogue was liberating. “Strangely, yes, it makes life in some ways more difficult but also really focuses you on the story. We kind of have a lot of evidence particularly when children watch the film, they really concentrate on the film as they do on the television episodes because it requires all the attention but they get more immersed in it as a result. So I found it very liberating because it’s a very pure way of making a film. It’s very cinematic. I can’t wait to make another one really, I love the idea of not using dialogue.”
One of the challenges is directing the voice talent on recording the various sounds that the characters make. “They are noises but they are still very crucial to get the right tone so it’s a question of the voice talent that we use actually understanding and getting the tone right so they can watch and understand how to enhance and how to make any shot or movement more understandable. It’s a lot of trial and error. And it’s very strange standing there saying, ‘Can you put a little more despair into that squeak?’ or ‘Can you make that squeak slightly lighter?'” It’s a process but we get there in the end. We put up the storyboards against a temporary track of grunts and squeaks and then we invite the voice artist to lay down some sounds for us and after the process is finished we refine them and we get them in again to see if they can improve on what we’ve already got.”
Starzak was influenced by silent film masters like Buster Keaton and Jacques Tati. “When I first started the series I always had Buster Keaton in mind because there is not a lot that you can do with Shaun’s face. He has just got eyes and occasionally a mouth but there’s not a lot to express with so I’ve got a picture of Buster Keaton on the door on the way into the studio to remind people what we’re trying to do. We watched a lot of funny comedies. Jacques Tati films are very clever in including a lot of ideas in the same shot and playing out the shots obviously with sounds but no dialogue which is kind of what we were aiming for.”
The most complicated scene in the film takes place in a restaurant, where the sheep are disguised as humans. “It’s almost a comedy of manners. We had to stage four characters sitting around the table then there was another table with two characters plus there was the waitress and the maître d’ and everything was quite complicated. The most fun thing to do was the hospital scene.”
It was a thrill to get a chance to interview one of my favorite screenwriters, Billy Ray (“Shattered Glass,” “Breach”) about the new film he both wrote and directed, “Secret in Their Eyes,” a thriller starring three Oscar winners, Julia Roberts, Chiwetel Ejiofor, and Nicole Kidman. It is the story of a horrific murder and its impact on the lives of three people, a prosecutor named Claire (Kidman), and two FBI investigators, Jess (Roberts) and Ray (Ejiofor). The movie goes back and forth in time, and I asked Ray about the skillful way that he as both writer and director allowed the story to unfold. “The story to me is about the character played by Chiwetel, Ray, he and Jess and Claire played by Julia Roberts and Nicole Kidman, they walked through a minefield 13 years ago and suffered horrible effects as a results. Now its 13 years later and Ray has come back to them and said, “Let’s walk through that again,” and they both know it’s a disaster although they know kind of on different level why it’s a disaster. But they both know as well that it is inevitable that they’re going to walk into that minefield again. And I felt it was really important to paint a picture of how the steps that they are taking now in 2015 completely mirrored the steps that they were taking in 2002. And that there was a certain inevitability to the tragedy in both time periods so you need to show the plot progression in 2002 with exactly the same plot progression now.”
What signals do you use to let the audience know what year we are in?
“You have a couple of cues. You have some hair and the whiteness in Ray’s beard. You have cultural references. If people are talking about 9/11 you know you’re in 2002. You have the character played by by Dean Norris, Bumpy. If he’s limping, it must be 2015. So we tried to drop as many of those in as we could without hammering it. It has always been a movie that requires some attention; I think that’s a good thing. I want the viewers of this movie to be actively in engaged in trying to piece together the puzzle of it. And part of that has to do with trusting your audience enough to know that it might take them 10 seconds into a scene to know exactly where they are but that they would be engaged by that. They will be with us.
This film is based on an Argentinian movie that won the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film in 2009. In the original film the stadium scene was a big showpiece and Ray does the same here with a chase scene in Dodgers Stadium. Tell me about the challenge of filming that scene.
First let me tell you that I grew up in Los Angeles in the San Fernando Valley and Dodgers Stadium was and is a cathedral to me. It’s one of the most important, iconic places of my entire life. So once I knew that we were going to be shooting the movie here in Los Angeles there was nowhere else I was going to put that scene except Dodgers stadium. It required a lot of begging, it was me personally hammering the LA Dodger organization, begging pleading, cajoling, doing everything I could to get them to say yes and eventually they did. And then of course we had to fight to make sure that we had the money in our budget to shoot it the right way which was its own challenge because we didn’t have an unlimited amount of money to spend on the movie. But it was extremely important to me because there are certain moments in the original that I just felt had to be honored and that soccer stadium sequence was certainly one of them, you know you can’t do that in Los Angeles and put it in a soccer stadium it is not the same thing here in an American context.
So for me to pick baseball which is a uniquely Americans sport and then to put it in a place that’s so well-known like Dodgers stadium with that great LA skyline certainly behind it, I just felt that that was going to be a great image and whatever we were going to do to get it we just had to do it.
So what was it like to film there?
We originally thought that we were going to have three full nights to shoot there. The schedule got compressed so we had to do it in two. So we had to be extremely prepared and very precise. We scouted dodger stadium eight times as a crew to make sure that that we know exactly what you are doing and that the camera was going to be in the right place. The trickiest thing in the world of course was that opening shot, the one that comes from behind hill and then over the parking lot over the stadium and then lands on Chiwetel and Dean and there was a lot of debate about how to do with that. At one point we thought it was going to be a drone but it turned out way too complicated because drones can’t fly at night, they can’t fly in a certain level of wind and they can’t fly in any rain at all. So if any of those eventualities took place were going to be scrubbed and that was going to be a disaster.
But someone invented this thing called the clouds cam which is a camera head that exists on a 30 foot long umbilical cord that hangs out of a helicopter so the helicopter could fly the camera head over the stadium and over the crowd but the helicopter would be high up above the cloud that they wouldn’t get the prop wash to blow their hair. So that’s what we did. It took 14 takes but we got what we wanted and moved on. It was designed actually to fly in between the crevices of ice glaciers so that they can get documentary footage inside glaciers. It doesn’t bounce and it doesn’t bobble at all. It stays very smooth and very steady.
There’s a struggle in the film between those who want to pursue the person responsible for a horrible murder and those who are more concerned with preventing future catastrophes.
Well to me, the movie is about the cost of obsession. And every beat in the movie turns on the idea of obsession all the way down to how they find the bad guys through their own obsession. Ray and Jess and to a slightly different degree Claire have an obsession about this case but they are running into people who have an equally valid obsession about public safety and that is why we set it against the backdrop of the repercussions of 9/11. I felt it was really important that the DA played by Fred Molina and the character played by Michael Kelly, have a valid point of view. And they do have a valid point of view which is that in those months right after 9/11, with the level of terror that was so great that if someone had come to me and said we can guarantee you that there will never be another 9/11 but we’ve got to take your civil liberties and we’ve got to take everybody’s liberties away, I would say, “Great, where do I sign?” You’re still in shock.
When you juxtapose that against the necessity for justice for this one case you then have the makings of good drama because everybody in the room has a completely valid and urgent point of view and they can defend it with great authenticity. That’s where we’re going for. I would love for this movie to be part of a larger conversation about the merits of this one case versus the needs of the public at large to be safe. It’s tricky and it’s nuanced and it’s not easy which is why I like it as a subject matter for this movie.
Interview: James Vanderbilt on “Truth,” With Cate Blanchett and Robert Redford
Posted on October 22, 2015 at 3:06 pm
James Vanderbilt wrote and directed Truth, based on journalist Mary Mapes’ book about the controversial story that ended her career at CBS News. Working with Dan Rather, she produced a news story with explosive allegations about President George W. Bush’s National Guard service in a story broadcast on “60 Minutes Wednesday” shortly before election day 2004. The allegations were based in part on two memos purported to be from the personal files of Bush’s late supervisor. After the broadcast, bloggers claimed they were forgeries. CBS organized a commission led by former Attorney General Dick Thornburgh and former Associated Press President Louis Boccardi, which produced a 224-page report, finding that the story was biased and inadequately supported.
The movie is based on the book by Mapes, with her side of the story. It stars Cate Blanchett and Robert Redford. Vanderbilt talked to me about his film, journalism, and legal standards of evidence and how all three relate to the challenges of truth and storytelling. “There are no rules and regulations in terms of how you put story on the air. It’s always a judgment call which is not obviously how things are done in the legal profession. So felt, I think, that they were in very new territory speaking to people who were Lawyers about how news is built and delivered and what their process was.”
Throughout most of the film, Mapes is exceptionally strong and decisive. But when her father publicly accuses her of having a left-wing agenda, she is painfully vulnerable. “I think it was the moment that broke her a little bit. One of the things that drew me to the story was her as a person and her as a character. You meet this woman who is at the height of her powers in many ways. She is extraordinarily bright and funny, she has the best job in her field, the perfect job, she works with the face of CBS news and she’s the one behind that putting those stories together for him. She’s just done the story of her career with , she has a great husband, she has a great kid. And so when we meet her it seems like it’s perfect, everything is perfect. As all of this goes down those pieces of armor that we all sort of have starts to get stripped away. We all have that scared kid inside us and those pieces of armor of protecting that kid, but they can disappear. And that moment with her father near the end was finally exposing her as a raw nerve. You think that scene is going to go one way and it goes another. And she just can’t do it. And when she told me that story I was floored that that really happened. And also seeing the relationship that she and Dan had first-hand from watching them interact I started to kind of go, ‘Oh this is what this is about, about this relationship, and fathers and daughters,’ and that’s really the emotion behind the piece. And that’s really why that whole storyline matters.”
Eleven years after the events of the film, Vanderbilt says that “Investigative journalism is in a very dangerous please right now. And I think investigative journalism is incredibly important and longer lead stories don’t get done. In the film there’s a moment where they go ‘Oh my God we only have five days to put this together’ and journalists I talk now go ‘God, I’ve got five days?'” He does not confuse his role with journalism, though. “My job first and foremost as a filmmaker is just to make an interesting film. I have to tell a compelling story. It’s up to you to decide whether we succeeded or not, but that’s the most important part of it for me. The subject matter in the story we are telling obviously is about investigative journalism so I wanted to do as much of that for ourselves as possible to try and put as many different ideas and point of view in the film as possible, too.”
Vanderbilt said that he especially loved talking to Dan Rather as a part of his research for the film. “The great thing about what I get to do is I get to sort of step into everybody’s job. I sit down and say, ‘Okay so what’s your day like? When do you wake up? Do you read papers in the morning, do you go online?’ And I love that process. Journalism is the only other thing besides what I do I ever considered going into because they are both storytelling. So I’ve always been fascinated with that world. Getting to sit with Dan Rather, just to sit with him, forget about the movie,0 was a great experience and getting to pick his brain, getting the details, not in terms of the factual like ‘Did this happen and this happen and this happen,’ because that is recorded other places and of course we went through that with him as well, but the feeling of the newsroom: ‘How did you feel when this happened? What was your experience like when this happened?’ And getting to watch him — you get to go to dinner with him and you can ask him questions — but then you observe, how is he treating the waiter. How is he having a conversation? My wife was at the dinner and at one point, like we all do, he used a curse word and he immediately apologized to her and immediately for me as a writer I go, ‘Oh, that’s great! That’s such a personality telling detail.’ And so there’s a moment in the film where he says ‘bullshit’ and then he apologizes to the makeup artist. But that’s the stuff that makes him human. And so with Dan a lot of what I was trying to do is to portray him as he really is in life and take this, the human quality of him, the stuff that you don’t always see through the television and bring that into the character. He was absolutely and extraordinarily gracious to all of us. And there were many opportunities for him to say during this whole process, ‘I’m anchoring the news five nights a week and doing all of these other stuff. I got that information from my producers.’ He could have thrown that team under the bus like that and that never happened and I felt that was a very telling interesting facet of him as a character.”
Cate Blanchett was so committed to the role that she actually learned to knit and practiced for hours for the few seconds her character was knitting on screen. “It is maybe five seconds in the finished film and Cate Blanchett was the type of person who goes and learns to knit for that moment. So that’s the level of actor you are dealing with.” And Vanderbilt encouraged Robert Redford to play Dan Rather by reminding him of the commitment to journalism he showed in producing and starring in “All the President’s Men.”
The title of the film is a bold choice. “The name of the movie is ‘Truth’ not because I know what the truth is. It is because it is the thing that everybody’s trying to get to in the movie. And it’s difficult to find. It’s elusive and tricky and you go down the rabbit hole looking for it sometimes. And clearly people lose careers over it but it still that thing that we all should be pulling for and we should want our journalists and media pulling for at the end of the day because that’s what keeps our society free.”
Interview: Reverend T.D. Jakes on His New Book, Destiny
Posted on October 19, 2015 at 3:35 pm
It is always refreshing and inspiring to talk to Reverend T.D. Jakes, and it was a great pleasure to have a chance to hear more about his new book, Destiny: Step into Your Purpose, a follow-up to his best-seller, Instinct.
You write that the conditions of our lives can distract us from meaning, allowing urgent to interrupt the important. How can people achieve some perspective?
We have confused busyness with effectiveness. We are busier than we’ve ever been before but perhaps less effective than we’ve ever been. And what I tried to lay out in the book is to cut away the clutter of all the things that you think you’re supposed to do that are not central to what your destiny or what your primary purpose is. And that’s why I devoted so much time to talking about priorities. Because I’m not saying that the busy things should not be done but they should not take priority over the purposeful things that we were created to do.
I sometimes think that that comes from a failure of courage. We are not comfortable thinking about our priorities and so we distract ourselves with a lot of busyness. Where do those messages come from?
A lot of it comes from our environment, our surrounding. We are often mentored by people who are mediocre, to be candid. When you get an opportunity to read or think or be exposed to somebody who is really progressive and got things done, their philosophical ideology is contagious. To find out from them — what did you prioritize, what did you make important, what did you regret, not just what you did right, what did you do wrong because we all do things that we look back on and say, “What was I thinking?” But to always remain a student, the liquidity of thought and nimbleness of mind to approach life from a perspective of a vacuum of “feed me, fill me,” not to always come into the class as a professor but to enter into the class as a student and to learn from your environment and the people that you are exposed to creates an environment to discovery.
A lot of us have become what our parents have modeled but we are not living in our parents’ world and they modeled to us something that may not work today. There were some things that my mother was diligently teaching me that are antiquated now that we don’t to be anymore. And so I think that we have to update and constantly remain relevant and I don’t think you get old until you stop learning.
I think we sometimes believe that the people who are achievers are in another category and that they are not still learning when in fact they are the ones who are still learning the most.
Absolutely! And the weirdest thing is that we do put them in another category and it is really not true. What is really beautiful is our ordinariness. Of course when you think about Jesus it doesn’t get any better than that and yet he looked so ordinary that the Roman soldiers had to hire somebody to point him out. And it was his ordinariness that made him special. It wasn’t like he was running around with some sign on him that says, “Hi, I’m Jesus.” He interacted with people who were flawed, who had different philosophical ideologies, who epitomizes what Beliefnet is doing. He engaged people where they were in a way that is non-traditional.
I find that we have slipped into so many silos, particularly in this country, where we only interact with people who vote like us, think like us and dress like us. And it has dumbed down our thinking. Nature teaches us that cross-pollination brings forth fruit but we have stopped cross pollinating, intellectually, spiritually when we only talk to people and we only watch on TV those programs that are a reflection of us.
How do we find people that are worth learning from?
You look for fulfillment in their eyes — and fear.
Fear?
Let me tell it this way, I recently was doing a test program for a talk show, I did a couple months of that and really, really enjoyed doing it, I was excited about it. I was lying in my bed in New York. I called my wife in the middle of the night and she said, “What are you doing up?” and I said, “I’m lying in the bed laughing” and she said, “What are you laughing about?” and I said, “Because I’m scared again.”
It is the beautiful gift of being thrown off-center. I am generally the interviewee not the interviewer so it was a role switch. And it threw me off, I wasn’t so sure of myself and I thought, “Oh gosh, suppose I mess it up, suppose I forget something I should’ve remembered.” And I thought what a gift it is to be a little intimidated, to be a little bit vulnerable, to be a little bit afraid. It makes us a little more prayerful, more careful and while God may have not given us the spirit of fear he was wise enough to give us the inclination to be afraid. It protects us in the jungle of life. And so I think when our lives become so predictable that we are not thrown off center we stop living. So that’s what I meant about fear. When you see somebody who is attacking something with intimidation like they are climbing up Mount Everest so to speak, get behind them, get behind them, get with them, join them on the journey. Because to get to see somebody struggle… My son said, “Daddy you taught me more by doing the talkshow than you did anything you’ve ever done.”
Do you feel that a fear mode is when you are most open to learning?
Oh yes, absolutely! And I was the most effective because I had told him things that he had never seen modeled. So he thought, “Dad is just confident, dad has just got a good ability.” But he knew daddy was nervous and he knew that he was intimidated and he got to see me fight my giant. That’s why I say if you see somebody with fulfillment in their eyes and fear get in behind them and follow them and you will learn things that are absolutely amazing.
In the book you say sometimes we do not surround ourselves with the right people. How do we find the right people?
We can talk about that all day. One thing that I notice all doctors run with doctors, lawyers run with lawyers, preachers run with preachers and isn’t that boring? Because when everybody that you run with does what you do they compete with you, they do not complete you. One of the wisest things you can do is put around you people who are strong where you are weak, who were very different from you. I learned that the trick to having great party is diversity around the table. You know, smart people from different worlds who engage each other makes the whole night amazing.
And we don’t always do this in our lives. Sometimes we put around us people who need us but they don’t complete us. We put around us people who lead us but don’t feed us. So we’re always feeding and never been fed, we are always giving and never receiving and our ability to receive gets rusty because we are never thrown off kilter and brought into an environment where we’re not the smartest person in the world and that’s a good thing. I think one of the greatest blessings of my life is that I had been able to be in so many different worlds and rooms. I describe myself as one of the few people who could have breakfast with Pat Robertson and lunch with Jesse Jackson. You know those are two different worlds. To be able to interact with extremes and polarities has made me broader. It has helped me to have a point of view that is not easily categorized and I think those opportunities, both of them at different times have said some things I don’t agree with but that doesn’t mean that we can’t have lunch. And maybe I can include influence a conversation or maybe I can learn from them… There’s just so many things… I think we are becoming so tribal in a way that makes me wonder if we’re not digressing as a society by tribalism.
How does this book help people locate their destiny?
I’m coming to a place in my life where I am doing less and less things that don’t make me thirsty to get out of the bed in the morning. You know what I’m saying? I’m not doing things just because you expect me to. If I don’t feel the passion and I don’t see the purpose I’m not doing it. With the few years I got left I’m going to be picky. I’m going to do things that make me feel alive and make me feel thirsty and creative. And so I think that’s one of the things you can do, find the thing that makes your eyes light up, that makes you read, that makes you thirst. Look for your passion and you’ll find your purpose.
Don’t try to find that from copying celebrities. All of the famous and rich is the what’s, the purposes comes from why. Money without purpose is nothing. Fame is a platform through which you can be heard but if you have nothing to say, what good is it other than getting through the restaurant a little quicker. I think that we need to get back to the whys and not the whats. If you chase the why the what will chase you, if you find your purpose the provision will find you, if you go on to the provision and you have no purpose the provision serves no purpose at all. What good is a car if you’re not going anywhere?
And that’s one of the reasons that I kind of want to be in the position to get in the room with them because I think sometimes when the church thinks about evangelism we always go to underserved communities, as if our doctors or lawyers or movie stars, our actors, our CEOs, our producers don’t need Jesus too. So to share your faith with the wider array of people could fill that void. I think that we are suffering from not only their inability to be meaningful in those high-profile worlds but they are a result of our negligence to touch them. It is really our negligence that created that because I know a lot of them and they stopped by the church before they became who they were. It’s not like they haven’t experienced us but because we were too narrow to throw our arms around them and so judgmental we missed an opportunity to create a transformative experience for somebody who had a platform who could have made a difference in the world.
What do you mean by a “plus ultra life?”
You have to realize my father got sick when I was 10 and he died when I was 16. I was born in between two dead babies. My mother lost one before me; she lost the one after me. When other fathers were teaching their kids to ride bicycles, which I never learned how to do, incidentally, my father was sick and on a kidney machine. There is nothing like being raised by somebody dying that makes you appreciate life. There is no other gift to give you that give you that ‘this can be taken away” and it makes you live differently than other people who take for granted that tomorrow will be there waiting, I don’t do that, I don’t do that.
Why are the steps you set out so important?
That’s what sets this book apart from other books. It goes beyond talking about purpose and destiny and goes out to the practical pragmatic steps, and those steps are different depending upon what your destiny is. So it’s hard to say in an interview or even in a book what those steps are because it may be different for a plumber than it is for an actor, than it is for preacher but everybody starts as somebody who is an apprentice.
And I talk about the beauty of rehearsal rather than recital, that sometimes we are so engrossed in the recital that we missed the rehearsal. We have raised a generation of people who know nothing about rehearsal only recital. They want quick answers, they want the destination but they don’t have the transportation. So this book is about steps, practical, pragmatic, process steps that lead you around to an expected end, and to celebrate the process and not just the promise, to enjoy the journey. Like in the creation, “And the evening and the morning was the first day and God said that it was good.” How can you say it was good when you weren’t finished? Giving yourself the permission to not be finished and celebrate accomplishment is very important in creating an atmosphere where you can remain creative. Sometimes we don’t celebrate till everything’s finished, that’s too late. I’m not sure there is a finish line.
I like the your very clear message to people who say they will wait until they are ready by telling them that it’s never a convenient time.
So here’s the thing — I don’t know about anybody else in my generation but I am shocked that my hair is white. I just can’t believe it. Where did the time go? And if you put off for tomorrow what you have the strength to do today, who says the strength will be there even if you are there tomorrow? You have to do with while you can, you have to do it while you can. A guy asked me why are you doing movies and running companies and you are a Pastor and I said, “I did it because I can.” I might not be able to tomorrow but I had the strength and I had the opportunities and I had the gift to be able to do it. Doing thing when you can is important. My mom died of Alzheimer’s which tells me you could be here and not be able to. So while you have the liquidity of thought to do something or energy or influence or connections you have to do that with all diligence or you miss your turn.
So what is the best way for somebody no matter what their skill to make a real contribution that can feel meaningful to them?
I think one of the problems that we have is that we’re so aware of other people’s gifts and we never know our own. And to see yourself as a gift requires that you have some level of self-esteem and worth of what you bring to the table. And I think sometimes we are so busy looking at what they bring to us that we don’t appreciate you bring to them. And then ultimately over time after the luster leaves what they bring to us we resent the fact that they don’t appreciate what bring to them when we should start the dialogue from the perspective of strength to strength.
How do we as parents help our children understand these lessons?
As a parent the thing I learned too late is that we talk more than we listen. I think that sometimes there comes a point in parenting where you are not the star of the world and very few parents get make that transition. My mother said to me, “I taught you how to have a deeper appreciation for your thoughts by listening to you when you talk.” She said parents who don’t listen to their children teach their children that what they think is not important. Those very core basic things have a lot to do with how we end up as a people and as a society and what level. I think we all have dysfunction but what level of dysfunction we have can be determined and prevented by how we were parented. My all-time heroes are my mother and father. They were flawed, they were very human, but they were very committed and very focused and I learned as much from their flaws as I did from their strengths. Flaws don’t exempt you from succeeding. You can drive a broken car and still get to school, even though you had to kick the door then roll out the window you can get there. And we have broken people husbands and wives and moms and dads and kids but that doesn’t mean we can’t arrive, if you learn how to work through the brokenness.
Interview: Writer-Director John Swetnam of the Dance film “Breaking Through”
Posted on October 11, 2015 at 3:49 pm
John Swetnam is the director of “Breaking Through,” the story of a young dancer who achieves viral fame and then sees it strain her relationships with her friends. I talked to him about the best way to film dancers “There was a Fred Astaire number that I showed my DP . It was one of these numbers where it was incredible because the camera hardly moved, it was sort of this really long wide shot that panned back and forth as they danced and I just loved it because it was like — they can dance! That was one of the things that was really important to me. In a lot of dance movies what happens is, you get the best actors you can, but not necessarily the best dancers so sometimes you have to have a body double or you have to have a lot of editing tricks to make the dance look good and make it look like they can dance, where I was really interested in just showing amazing dancers. It was a thought that I had after seeing every dance movie probably ever made. But I just wanted to put a camera around them, just shoot it handheld, have long takes and just watch them dance, not try to do anything else just let them be dancers. So that was a huge influence for me and that was the first thing I said when I was making ‘Breaking Through.’ I said, ‘I just want a handheld camera and just point it at them and let them be great and not try to hide that in any way.'”
The dances in the film are in a variety of settings, including one inside a car, a challenge, especially with a limited budget. “I’ve worked more in the studio system where you have lots of money and lots of time to do these things where with this movie the biggest thing from the beginning was we just want to make a movie. So we were just like: ‘What is it going to take?’ So we didn’t have a lot of money. We didn’t have a lot of time. And I’m working dancers who were not actors. Almost all of them I found through auditions or on YouTube and they never acted in anything before. So it’s like super challenging already because you have a tight budget and you have a tight shoot and you working with people that have never acted before. So the whole thing was really really difficult. But when we got to the dance numbers that actually became the easier part because they were comfortable compared to the dialogue scenes. So that was the fun stuff. It was just like putting them in a cool location. They had done the choreography a couple weeks before, they just shine. I always had the idea for the car thing as I always see YouTube videos where you put the camera up in the front and they came up with the choreography and did it really fast. They nailed it every time and had such a blast doing it, and I thought it was really fun. And then the couple dancing scene which is one of my favorites. Keone and Mari Madrid are a huge YouTube dancing couple and their choreography is really about couples and storytelling. That was the one number that they choreographed and it was incredible because you’re telling the story between two people. You have this amazing dance number going on at the same time it’s servicing the characters and narrative. I had originally planned to shoot that at an abandoned basketball court with a spotlight. So originally it was supposed to be on a cement parking lot and then Enis, the choreographer said, ‘What if we just move it over here where they shot that last scene where they’re talking on the bench?’ We moved it over there to the sand and the dust literally just happened. But we did not plan for that, nothing. It was this kind of one of those ‘Holy cow this looks pretty cool!’ It was one of those lucky moments.”
Swetnam is not a dancer himself (other than “the occasional wedding or night club”) but he loves working with them. “I really love the energy of dancers. There’s something about working with dancers. I don’t know if it’s because they don’t have the egos of actors but there’s something very sincere about them. It’s just so hungry and ambitious and cool. I’m actually doing another dance series that I am shooting in the fall. I do enjoy it. I do other things but hopefully the dance world will let me just stay in it as long as I can.” He wanted the movie to reflect the changes in the way that dancers and choreographers connect to their audiences. “They’re taking control for themselves now. Choreographers and dancers can create their own online presence, and they themselves become a brand, a name that you will recognize. And I think that that movement is already happening. The subculture that I talk about in the movie is not only real, but it’s growing exponentially. Bigger brands, bigger companies are getting involved. It’s blowing up where these kids have millions of followers that are making lots of money, making their own videos, and they are becoming sort of their own kind of celebrity. And I just think that for anyone who wants to dance they’re so many places to dance out there now. If you want to see a great dance number you can go on YouTube and there’s thousands of these really well done dance numbers. If you want to learn how to dance they have tutorials. It’s just opens it up to everybody I dig that and I think it’s just moving more and more in that direction and I want to be a part of that space as these online dancers and that community continues to grow.”
The movie touches on some serious themes as well. “I wanted to get as many ideas in it as I possibly could and one was seeing the other side of it. It’s not just about Youtube and celebrity. It’s about the access because of the internet. With kids whose videos get leaked there are sometimes pretty tragic consequences. So I at least felt like I had to try my best to get that in there because it’s part of that world. A lot of people just want to tape everything film it and get it online. And there’s a danger to that as well you know because anyone can do that and you have to be very very careful about what you put out there, and what you allowed to be put out there. So it was important to show that side of it as much as I could. It’s important especially for young people. Maybe they just feel like ‘Don’t let that happen to me’ kind of thing. So it was important. I like to try to have some kind of message. I don’t want to be a preacher or I don’t want to be on a pulpit I just like to put something out there for people to check out and talk about.”