Can a film be effective without memorable visuals? Possibly yes, but the films that have achieved immortality have almost always been borne of a balance between the words on the page and the images that are burned into our collective consciousness.
As it applies to indie filmmakers, the design of a film is a relative process, and very much dependent on money and equipment. But with the increasing size and scope of a project (even with a budget in the low six figure range) it would be wise to think about bringing a production designer on board. The designer is responsible for the overall look of the film—making sure the locations and sets meld with the vision of the film, all while serving the story. And although this might not be a major concern of the low dollar auteur with a three person crew who is determined just to get a film made, filmmaking, of course, is a visual medium.
The design of a film should be finalized as soon as possible in pre-production. Some indie films are dictated solely by whatever location the writer has in mind and the size of the budget. If you have access to a particular house with a certain vibe, or some bombed out factory to set your post-apocalyptic zombie magnum opus, then you have probably written your script around what you can afford to do and the amount of access you have.
But if you have a budget that calls for multiple locations, different set pieces, or the need and ability to alter said locations, this is where the designer comes together with the producers, director, cinematographer and location manager to turn your vision into a finished film with great visuals.
Production designer Mark Tanner has been working in the film industry for more than thirty years, cutting his teeth on the original “Clash of the Titans” under the legendary effects master Ray Harryhausen. Tanner’s credits include “Waking Ned Devine” (as Art Director), “Awaydays,” and the recently completed “Julia X 3D,” which is now out on the festival circuit. Tanner’s design career has paralleled the gradual change in film from strictly conventional set pieces, matte paintings, and physical effects to the marriage of CGI with traditional effects, as well as the recent 3D boom.
While some may see production design as a separate aspect of filmmaking, Tanner believes that the design of the film should work closely as a part of the story, even if the final look of the film comes in towards the end of pre-production.
“Design in film is all about driving the narrative,” he said. “It’s all about helping the story move along, decorating the story, if you like, rather than the sets. The sets really come in right at the end when you’ve decided what all these people are, where they’ve come from, what they do with every minute of the day, with their weird tics.”
Once the final draft is completed, and the casting process is done, the production team has to go about deciding how everything operates in the physical world.
“And then you start to build environments,” Tanner said. “And that’s basically what it’s all about. Because if you put a backstory, we all agree on a backstory—this character and this character—then you can start to actually define their space. That’s really how we go about it.”
As CGI has been refined and applied to more and more projects (even some indie films), production design has changed somewhat. And while it seemed for a time that filmmakers were going off the deep end in creating nothing but computer animated playgrounds, the film world has gradually come around to the conclusion that it’s best to find a happy medium between CGI and physical effects.
And for someone like Tanner, who was at Pinewood Studios in the late 1970s when the original “Superman” was being made (the film made extensive use of back projection, set pieces, and rigging for the flying sequences), as well as being under the tutelage of stop-motion guru Harryhausen, he knows that it is best if traditional effects have a place at the table. And, by the way, Tanner is not too enthusiastic about the recent remake of “Clash of the Titans.”
“It’s something that I’m very passionate about because of my background,” he said. “We created some beautiful stuff, and it’s very much hands on, {by} creative artisans. You’ve got model makers and painters…So it’s easy to feel nostalgic about that stuff. But obviously, things move on, and the biggest challenge is moving on with them.”
So now, even movies with extensive CGI often use matte painting and models to achieve realistic results (provided that is what you are trying for), eliminating the feeling of being in strictly a cartoonish world (CGI) or in danger of someone in the audience being overly concerned that your spaceship looks too much like a plastic toy (physical effects).
“The best way to get what we want to get is to combine the two,” Tanner said. “So you’re building models, you’re still using the amazing artisans who can make things look incredible, and incredibly real, whatever size they are. And then you can combine it with CGI. And now it works better. CGI on its own is pretty much crap. Even ‘Avatar,’ you’re still utilizing old school forms to marry with CGI, so you get this amazing effect, right bang in the middle. The two feed each other, and in my humble opinion, they can’t live without each other now.”
Something else that production designers contend with is the misconception that a film seemingly dominated by its locations has little input from the production designer. Tanner’s recent film, “Julia X 3D” was shot in Louisiana, which of course is very atmospheric and lends itself to a certain look. But that in itself is a function of design.
“People go, ‘there wasn’t much design because it was all locations,’” he said. “And I totally disagree because the location department is a natural extension of my department. And I kind of take as much control of that as I can, because I need this thing to look the way that I see it and the director sees it. So we were very lucky in as much as we had a good location team and had some fantastic locations, thanks to P.J. (Pettiette, director and co-writer of the film) and his contacts, and Matt (Cunningham, co-writer) because it’s very much his hometown.”
As the title suggests, “Julia X 3D” was shot in 3D. It was Tanner’s first foray into that medium, prompting him to do extensive research on the subject before filming began. From a design standpoint, he was insistent that the film immerse the audience rather than merely launch objects at the audience for the jolt factor. There were some challenges, but it all comes down to the balance that a designer (and certainly one with experience) tries to bring to the project. The production team essentially transformed a house they found in Louisiana to suit their needs.
“We kind of saturated it a little bit more; we kind of overdressed it a bit more, because of the 3D thing,” he said. “We took to create the layers. Again, no thrusting, none of that, that’s not down to me. But certainly all the sets and violence that we put people in. We were extremely lucky because we packed a house, a whole house, a huge house. In the location that we wanted. We saw the house—and it was lived in—but we got it, and I got my construction guys, and we literally moved practically every wall in this house.”
Even on a thriller like “Julia X 3D,” Tanner knows that suspension of belief can only go so far. Narrative films are largely escapism, but a designer has to keep an audience immersed in the story through striking visuals--realism being a relative term, of course, but they should always be effective.
“That’s really what we strive for is authenticity,” he said. “If the audience doesn’t see it or feel it, you’ve lost them. And I’m not suggesting that they shouldn’t be looking at the design--as I said, the design drives the narrative--but if it drives it off in a weird way, the audiences are intelligent, they’re going to see that and you’ve lost them. I take that on as a huge responsibility. I’m also a storyteller, as I think most of us are, not just a designer of pretty pictures.”
