As a seasoned filmmaker with years of experience under my belt, I can certainly relate to Neil’s journey. Just like him, I too have spent countless hours tinkering away in my “bedroom,” as it were, driven by an unyielding passion for storytelling and the latest technology. It’s fascinating to see how technology has evolved, transforming from a mere tool into an integral part of the narrative itself.
Released on September 17, 2004, “Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow” was an action-adventure with romantic undertones, reminiscent of the serials from the 1930s that inspired George Lucas and Steven Spielberg in creating “Star Wars” and “Raiders of the Lost Ark.” However, despite earning $58 million at the box office, which was higher than its reported initial budget of $70 million, it was still considered a financial flop for Kerry Conran, the first-time director behind this film (and to date, his only one).
In the same interview with EbMaster, Conran expressed that while this movie brought me joy, it also caused me distress.
The filmmaker hailing from Flint, Michigan was not the pioneer in utilizing a “virtual backlot” for storytelling, as George Lucas had already utilized digital previews and blue screen technology in the “Star Wars” prequels, and Kazuaki Kiriya’s “Casshern” came before him, with Robert Rodriguez’s “Sin City” following closely. However, the intricate and detailed depiction of a time-displaced 1939 world he created laid the foundation for various projects like the Disney+ series “The Mandalorian,” which employs computer-generated backdrops similar to The Volume, as well as James Cameron’s immersive “Avatar” films.
Despite being often overlooked as a pioneering platform for digital filmmaking technology in the years following its release, “Sky Captain” has also been excessively labeled a failure by Conran. To mark the 20th anniversary of this movie, Conran had a detailed discussion about the film’s creation, production methods, and enduring impact. He disclosed that the production cost was not as high as initially reported. “It’s hard for me to discuss this,” he admits, “I need to remember that I’m not the only one involved here, and there are many who worked tirelessly on it and genuinely appreciate the film. And I do too.
[This interview has been edited and condensed.]
Can you talk about what first inspired you to make “Sky Captain?”
Clearly, my childhood passion for comic books played a significant role in my life, and the captivating world of “Star Wars” created by Spielberg and Lucas further ignited my imagination. The serial format was appealing, allowing me to transform the stories I’d long admired into reality. Given the limited resources available at the time, I approached this endeavor from an experimental, independent perspective, aiming to create something bold and innovative. Eventually, all these elements came together to shape what it ultimately became.
As a kid, were you very interested in technology, or was it just a means to an end?
I’d say a little of both. I think there’s the experimenter-inventor kind of thing that I always admired, be it Edison or Tesla or whoever. I wasn’t smart enough mathematically or scientifically like they were, but what they did and what they created was inspirational in its own way. And certainly Walt Disney, the things that [his company] invented all for the sake of telling a story, like the multiplane camera that kind of revolutionized animation, was a huge inspiration. And so in that regard, I like to know how things work behind the curtain — but as a means to an end. I never went super deep into these things, but I learned it so when you’re presented with an opportunity to combine that base of knowledge, you might have a means to actually achieve that idea.
What gave you the confidence to feel not only that this was feasible, but the best way to achieve your goals?
Essentially, what sparked my interest was a combination of factors. I attended CalArts and fell in love with their animation department. Simultaneously, I got an early version of software called After Effects. When I first opened it, it felt like a revelation – it was similar to Photoshop but for video. This tool seemed to be replacing the traditional optical printer, which was something I was familiar with from my animation days. It made me wonder if live action could be treated like animation, and if we could create flat backgrounds and add foreground elements. Although blue screen work had been around for a while, this was the first time I could do it on my home computer. This newfound ability to experiment with these tools was right at my fingertips in my apartment. Furthermore, I realized that if I applied theatrical techniques, I could get away with more. So, I chose to work within the limitations of the software and embrace its unique capabilities.
After discovering a fascination with German Expressionism, I found a small software program that allowed me to merge this interest with various other elements. This led me to experiment with photography, layering backgrounds with foregrounds, all in black and white for a seamless blend of old and new images. Over time, I created a series of shots which eventually formed a short film that gained traction. However, after four years of work, the film was only six minutes long and I felt it needed assistance. It was then that I presented my work to Jon Avnet, who understood its potential, and together we moved forward with the project.
Even knowing your idea was going to be executed in a highly ambitious way, how tough or easy it was it to make sure that the story itself was engaging and resonant?
The writing and filmmaking process wasn’t a breeze for me, as I’m not a world-class writer or anything. I may not be exceptional at much, but I’m not hopeless either. My work was driven by inexperience, both in making the movie and writing – it felt like not knowing any better. At the time, I didn’t give much thought to my potential audience. Initially, I envisioned creating a ‘lost film,’ something discovered, emulating the authentic style of films made in the 1930s. This approach made the technical aspect of writing more challenging.
Initially, when I first approached Jon, I inquired if he could potentially secure around three million dollars. To my surprise, he confidently responded, “I believe we can exceed that.” And indeed, he delivered more than expected. This influx of funds led to a significant upgrade from a monochrome production to full color, and the need to incorporate 3D elements that I hadn’t initially planned for. Consequently, we had to innovate techniques to work at an accelerated pace. This dynamic process significantly impacted the writing as I found myself constantly adapting and modifying my approach due to the evolving circumstances. If given a chance to do it over, I would’ve aimed for a creative direction more like that of Lucas and Spielberg – one that was less imitative and more inspired by the serials. While visually striking for its time, this approach may have hindered viewers from fully connecting with the characters and following their journey.
Its pacing is very anachronistic. Was that on the page, or once you started directing and editing, it came together in reflection of your aesthetic as a filmmaker?
In the past, the rhythm or speed of the scenes was a point of contention. I found myself captivated by the vivid imagery; for example, the zeppelin’s arrival scene might have been extended twice as much as it is today, which I enjoyed immensely. However, Jon kept urging me to trim it down a bit and speed things up. To this day, there are parts that I believe were edited too swiftly according to my preference, with the exception of Jon’s advice, which I found particularly valuable: “When you’re filming with actors, always shoot a take that is twice as fast as you think it needs to be.” We ended up using all the faster takes. While we wanted to savor some aspects, we were also engaged in storytelling and creating a sense of urgency and drama. I believe we struck a good balance. If this production were made today, the pace would likely mirror that of contemporary films. And frankly, I’m not sure I would have the patience for it as I did back then.
Can you talk about what the casting process was like?
Initially, Jude and Gwyneth had a knack for venturing into both mainstream and indie films, taking risks along the way. A key factor that sparked interest was a short film – Jon Avnet shared it with Jude first, and he jumped on board straight away. At the time, we didn’t even have a script. Excited by this opportunity, Jude approached Gwyneth, who also quickly agreed to join. They were ready to dive headfirst into something uncertain, taking a significant risk. In essence, their courageous decision paved the way for the film’s production – something I can never truly repay them for; they made it all possible.
The camera team experienced some doubt due to being asked to film non-existent scenes, which they found hard to believe would work effectively. However, a quick pre-visualization was requested from Steve Yamamoto, the head of the animation department, using the footage that had just been shot. This pre-vis was sent overnight, and on the second day of shooting, everyone was shown a very rough representation of what the office could look like with certain elements blocked in. This seems to have been a turning point for everyone, as it instilled confidence that they might be working on something groundbreaking and intriguing, thereby altering the overall atmosphere.
How did you help Jude and Gwyneth understand the tonality of that ‘lost film’ feeling you were aiming for?
Initially, I was filled with fear. I didn’t strive to present myself differently than who I truly was – a plump kid from Michigan eagerly creating an unusual film. By nature, I’m quite self-deprecating, and this trait was evident in my interactions with everyone. It was comforting having Jon Avnet on board because it felt like there was a responsible adult present to address any concerns if anything went awry. This likely boosted their confidence, but I believe they were also drawn to the idea of working on an experimental film. With Jude and Gwyneth, I didn’t require numerous takes. On rare occasions, I would recall Jon’s instruction to “do one a little faster,” but if their performance aligned with my mental image, then that was sufficient. In essence, I tried not to appear overly starstruck or intimidated.
Were you satisfied by the finished result? And if not, was there a point of distance that gave you a clearer perspective on the film?
Initially, I acknowledged that the movie wasn’t flawless and I took full responsibility for its shortcomings. I’m okay with that. While I believe I didn’t fail outright, I wish the film had performed better financially at the box office. There were factors contributing to this. The movie wasn’t initially designed to be what it ultimately became. Originally, when I was working on it single-handedly, I aspired for it to be an independent film that stood out from others due to its grandeur. However, it turned into something else. To put it simply, Jon and the studio provided me with opportunities and gave me space to work, so it wasn’t a nightmare scenario where someone came in and drastically altered everything. Instead, we collaborated, and I did my best to adapt to their inputs.
Reflecting on the matter, it’s clear that the movie didn’t achieve its primary goal due to financial reasons. There seems to be some confusion about the film’s actual cost. Initially, our budget ranged from $3 million to $10 million. However, the final cost ended up being around $12 million. This extra funding wasn’t provided by me; it was used for making the film in color and purchasing additional computers for our render farm to speed up production. At that time, Paramount had a delayed “Mission: Impossible” movie, so they needed something for their winter release. I didn’t promise a specific timeline because our limited resources could only produce a certain number of frames per hour. More money was invested to buy more computers as a result. The budget discrepancy might have arisen from the fact that a significant portion of the film’s profits were sold by the financier, which wasn’t directly reinvested in the movie itself. Despite the film costing $12 million, it would have been considered successful if compared to its original projections. Paramount did invest a substantial amount, but those decisions were beyond my control.
So the $70 million that was previously reported refers to the cost of selling it to Paramount, or that Aurelio made from picking up distribution?
We initially showed only 10 minutes of footage from the film to multiple studios, and Paramount ended up buying it for a substantial sum. Aurelio overstated the film’s production cost, giving the impression that it was much more expensive than it actually was. The high bids on the film were so high that rumors circulated that Aurelio used the money to purchase a soccer team. While someone likely lost a significant amount of money in this deal, it wasn’t due to the film’s performance. This is where my disappointment stems from – my lack of understanding about the industry. Aurelio took a risk with the film, and if he made a profit, that’s great for him. However, I feel that the film’s financial expectations were raised because of this deal, which may have put additional pressure on its box office performance. In other words, the high cost of the film set a challenging benchmark for its success.
How much did that perception impact the opportunities that you got afterward?
Immensely. The belief was that a significant amount of money was squandered in the production of the movie, yet it wasn’t related to me or the film itself. At that point, I was collaborating with Sherry Lansing, who held a prominent position at Paramount Studios. She was particularly fond of my work. They possessed the rights to “John Carter of Mars” at the time, which was slated as the sequel to this project. We embarked on it using similar creative strategies, and it was progressing well. However, Sherry departed from Paramount, leaving a new leadership in place that I had no prior relationship with. They only saw a youngster who had allegedly caused financial losses working on such a large-scale project.
For almost a year, I was deeply involved in the project “John Carter”. We were on the brink of finalizing casting and commencing shooting. However, the individual who held the decision-making power had a close bond with Jon Favreau at that time and was seeking something for him. As a result, it was passed to him. Subsequently, I worked on a project with DreamWorks, involving live-action animation. About two years following the release of “Sky Captain”, I realized this wasn’t the path for me. I couldn’t invest a year’s worth of effort into something and then abandon it. So, I chose to return to my independent pursuits once more. Although “John Carter” didn’t earn $100 million, if it had, our collective work might have taken a different course. But for now, I’m still here!
You were able to read the tea leaves a little bit and anticipate what would become the era of the Volume. Have you stayed current with the technology so that if you had the right opportunity, you could slide pretty easily into that kind of challenge?
Absolutely, I’ve been away but I’ve certainly been busy. My fascination has always leaned towards technology as a means of progress. Around 2010, I attended the E3 gaming convention and was blown away by the Unreal Engine 3. It was incredible for gaming back then, and it sparked an idea in me: why not use this for filmmaking? The challenge we faced with rendering was time-consuming, but this software could do it in real-time. Valve, the company behind “Half-Life,” had also developed an engine for their animatics, which seemed like a non-linear editor, except that the video portion remained a dynamic 3D scene. This meant you could edit scenes and manipulate elements instantly – a truly revolutionary concept. Unfortunately, at that time, Valve was not open to sharing this technology with others as they intended to use it for their own projects.
And then over the years, Epic evolved with Unreal Engine 5, and that’s when “The Mandalorian” and the Volume and all these started using it. Unreal is what drives the Volume. And so suddenly now you have a tool that really is almost capable of creating photorealistic live action. So, I would say yes, I’ve kept up to date. And certainly what’s happening now with AI is once again going to change things dramatically because a year from now there may not even be the need to render. But to answer your question, I continue to work on a lot of different things, and I’m very hopeful, I’ve got two projects that I think we have a real chance with. It’s been a long, long wait, unfortunately.
How have you figured out a way to mitigate the risks you’re taking in developing projects?
To put it simply, even if I part ways with a producer for any reason, the work I’ve done together remains mine. I’m currently holding back on discussing this due to timing constraints, but essentially, I’ve returned to my initial position, both figuratively and literally speaking. While I collaborate with many individuals, the mindset behind these partnerships is consistent. After much exploration, I’ve found my way back to a point where I focus solely on myself as a compass. I believe that being true to oneself and trusting in what you like resonates with others.
I have one more question about the movie: in the final shot, is the lens cap on or off?
To be honest, I’m unsure about it because we were preoccupied with numerous things at the time, possibly causing the camera to have a physical lens cap. However, I haven’t re-watched the film since its release. When it was initially written, the scene included the lens cap, symbolizing that she missed a precious moment with him, something intended to be private between them forever, which I found to be an endearing, poignant conclusion.
Read More
- ACT PREDICTION. ACT cryptocurrency
- W PREDICTION. W cryptocurrency
- Hades Tier List: Fans Weigh In on the Best Characters and Their Unconventional Love Lives
- Smash or Pass: Analyzing the Hades Character Tier List Fun
- PENDLE PREDICTION. PENDLE cryptocurrency
- Understanding Movement Speed in Valorant: Knife vs. Abilities
- Why Destiny 2 Players Find the Pale Heart Lost Sectors Unenjoyable: A Deep Dive
- Sim Racing Setup Showcase: Community Reactions and Insights
- How to Handle Smurfs in Valorant: A Guide from the Community
- Mastering Destiny 2: Tips for Speedy Grandmaster Challenges
2024-09-17 18:49