Site created 12/15/97.		page created: 7/16/99 DVD and the Filmmaker (transcript - Page 2) back to page 1 The panelists discuss DVD and home video. Maltin: Now Eric, you told me, when we were talking backstage, that when you did your commentary for ANTZ, you and your co-director decided to just do it, and not overly prepare, and not read a script. So you did it in the same amount of time it takes to watch it one time... Darnell: That's right - we did it in just one take. We wanted it to be fresh and conversational, as if the person listening had just sat down in the room with us, and there's always stuff to talk about. There's never any concern that you wouldn't have anything to say, perhaps fortunately or unfortunately. But particularly in the animation medium, there is so much to talk about - so many things about the process that people don't understand and want to know more about, or are interested in. With this commentary, we were hopefully able to fill people in on details they might not have been aware of. And we just had plenty of stuff to talk about. In fact, Tim would be talking and something else would go by on the screen, and I'd think, "Oh, I wanted to mention that!" But it would be too late, and we'd have to move on to something else. So I suppose we could have done a couple commentaries. ANTZ co-director Eric Darnell. Maltin: Well, and you really packed your DVD with extras. Tell us some of the things you were able to put on the DVD. Darnell: Well the ratio with animation is huge - probably a hundred to one at least - because, all day long, all 180 people who were working on the film were constantly re-calculating whatever aspect of the film they were working on. So whatever it is that we happen to save of that material is something that could be used for the DVD. And we had a significant amount of material for that. From storyboards to layout, to motion, to the final lighting, we were able to run a couple of sequences that way on DVD, so that people could see the progression on how animation sort of comes together. Along with that was live action, video reference footage of Gene Hackman and Woody Allen and the rest of the performers doing the voice-overs, to still images of drawings of the character design work, all of which Tim and I were able to speak over, so we could tell the audience what they were looking at. So quite a lot of material, combined with some material we had done particularly for the DVD, transition stuff, and so forth. So the whole package came out great. Maltin: So that sort of dispels the thought that it's all done by computers, with computers. You still use pencils in the beginning... Darnell: Yes, yes. We're always fighting that though. A lot of people ask, "Don't you just type in WALK, and the characters walk across the screen?" I wish it were that easy, but it takes as much time with computers as doing it traditionally. I guess the only thing you don't have is what we call in-betweeners. The computers are able to extrapolate - and you do wish you had a person there... Maltin: We should explain what you mean by that. In the old days, the key animator would draw this movement and then the next major movement of a character, and then there would be all these movements in between that needed to be drawn. Darnell: Right. And you'd give those two drawings to an in-betweener, with some instructions about how to draw all of the individual frames in between, that would get you from point A to point B. And so an animator - with computers - now has to give those instructions to someone on a computer, and the computer would draw out those frames. But the instructions now have to be much more specific and tediously laid out than you would ever have had to do before, in order for the computer to understand. So in that way, it's almost more time consuming. Maltin: Now you made reference Brett, before, to the fact that you could put deleted scenes on a DVD, so that people could see why you deleted them. But I know that there are some directors who hate the idea. I guess it's about the control of their old films - older ones that they made under the old studio system. And they're appalled at the idea that stuff is being dredged up from the cutting room floor. Stanley Donen, who directed so many great MGM musicals, doesn't like that. He likes video, and is supportive of video, but he says, "That's why we cut the stuff - we didn't like it. It didn't work. Leave my film alone." And I was wondering how you feel about that. Brett, you've had control of that so far. And Mr. Altman, you've done so many films, and some of your early cuts were almost legendary, for example the wedding in Nashville - you shot a lot of stuff. Would you want to see yourself, or someone else, release this material? Altman: Well, I have... we have control over what goes on. They can't put anything on, or make any changes, without my approval. So a lot of that, I'm happy to show it. My main concern in all this is protecting the actors. I would never want to show a scene or a take that the actors didn't think was successful, or that made them look bad. So... but I do have control. And some scenes, like you said [points to Ratner], I'm very happy with, but for whatever reason, they just didn't make the final cut. And I don't mind showing that. The prolific director, Robert Altman. Ratner: Sometimes it's a matter of including an alternate scene. You know, I wouldn't want to show a scene that's in the movie, but that's a bad take - a mistake, unless it's comedy, it's funny. It's sort of like the outtakes that we used in Rush Hour. Maltin: Well, and Jackie Chan has really made a career of that. The credits of many of his films are nothing but his close calls, and failed stunts. It's actually good fun, and he's the butt of all the laughs... Ratner: Where I actually saw that first was in Being There, which the end credits of the movie were so brilliant, because the character that Peter Sellers was playing was so strange, and then you saw him cracking up. And I always loved that when Jackie did that in his other films. It's great to see that I think, because the actors are playing the characters, but when they break from that, and they speak to the other actors and the director, you kind of feel like you can know them better. You see them in their own mannerisms, and their own voice - it's a nice little treat for people I think. Myself, as a movie fan, when you get a chance to see your favorite actors - as themselves - in a light or funny moment, I appreciate that. Maltin: [to Altman] Nashville is one of my all-time favorite films, and my favorite film of yours, even though your list of credits is long. But I seem to remember that, and correct me if I'm wrong, at one time, there had been talk of you presenting that as a miniseries on ABC. Because ABC financed that... Altman: Yeah, well. That's - people have come to me and said, "I understand that you have another 5 hours of film on that." Which is not true. When it went to television, there was some discussion for a while that since it was such a long film, they were going to do it on two separate days. So I did an edit which added footage. Mostly it was repeated footage, and it was footage that, if you saw it in one sitting, was too much. So we did that, and that's where the rumors got out. I think someone misread it, and thought that we had this enormous rough cut. But everything that I wanted on the big screen, was on the screen. Maltin: That leads to my next question, which is, how tempting is it to tamper with your own movie now, if you have the chance? [to Herzog] I mean, you've been at this for a while. When you go back, Werner, and revisit one of your films, is there any temptation to tinker with it? Herzog: I guess my attitude is a little bit different than most here, which is that a carpenter should never sit on the shavings. So we threw away whatever wasn't needed, because it would sit on the roll of negative, and it would cost money to store it, and that sort of thing. Nowadays, in some instances, I do regret that. For example, in Fitzcarraldo we shot all this film with Jason Robards and Mick Jagger, and Robards became ill, and he had to go back to the United States, and his doctor wouldn't allow him to return and finish it. And there was great footage of him and Mick Jagger, who played his retarded sidekick. And Mick Jagger did this sort homage to Richard III, and it was really great stuff, and it was wonderful. But when we went back to shoot the film all over again with Klaus Kinski, I threw everything away. And regrettably so. Some of it survived when this documentary filmmaker got a bit of the footage from me, but the rest is lost. But beyond that, I would say that I have never tried to tinker with my stuff. I never thought I should change it. I accept what I did, and that was a phase of my life back then, and it is what it is. But there is always some sort of idea, deep in the back of my mind, that my films are all connected somehow. And at the end of my life, I should just compile it all into one big movie. [audience laughs] Nowadays you can digitize things and change them, so.... It's a fantasy - a nice thought. Maltin: It's an interesting fantasy. [laughs] Altman: I think it's like your films are your children. They're all grown up now, and that's what they are. And you don't go back and say, "Well, maybe we can go in and stretch this kid out a little more." [audience laughs] That's just what it is. And I think - I find that I like my least successful children the most. So when people come up and say, "What's your favorite film?", I'll come back and say, "Which one do you like the least?" And they say something like Quintet. I say, "Oh, that's the one - that's my favorite!" [more laughs from the audience] Eric Darnell and Robert Altman. Ratner: I also think that director's cuts are examples of, you know, studio censorship. Everyone wants to see a director's cut, when they know that the studio got involved and cut up a picture, and fucked with it - did something that the director didn't want to do. And I'm hoping that, in the future, the director's cut of a director's film, IS the final cut. And it doesn't become a situation where the studio comes in and says, "Oh well here's the version that we want to put out, because it will make the most money." The director's original version should be THE cut, and then there won't be any need for these so-called director's cuts. [applause from audience] Maltin: I've always found that term suspect. I think, "You mean the one I paid 8 bucks to see wasn't what the director wanted on film? What am I seeing here?" And the same studio then puts the film out on video, so there's a certain degree of hypocrisy there. I'm not sure how much. Condon: I think the way movies are made now is changing. I know I'm working with three young filmmakers on an anthology movie, and by the time it's done - it's a very rough movie - we want to make it an unrated film. And already the studio people are talking about the DVD version. So that's liberating, because you can shoot anything you can possibly imagine, but at the same time, it's being used as a club against people putting that version of the film into theatrical release. Maltin: So you're saying that the studios are saying, "We are gonna sit on you - you can't do what you want in the theaters, but don't worry - we'll let you put it all on the DVD..." Condon: Yeah. I think DVD is becoming this sort of "promised land" for directors. And in a way, it's being used as a slight call for censorship by the studios... Maltin: Because they can give you that carrot later on... Condon: Right. Maltin: I know that Lawrence Kasdan, for the recent theatrical re-release of The Big Chill, was being encouraged put some footage back that he did have, including the famous footage of Kevin Costner, as the dead friend that they were all attending the funeral of. And he thought about it, and he watched the old footage again, and he decided, "No, that's not the movie. I made the movie, and that ought to stand." But again, understanding the commercial come-on, they all want to be able to say, "Never-before-seen footage!" Regardless of the reason that it was never-before-seen... Condon: Yeah, it also seems that a lot the DVDs that are being released are pan & scan only. And I think that, as a consumer, I just know that they want me to buy that one, and then next year, they're gonna come out with the deluxe version, with everything and widescreen... you wonder about that. Maltin: Interestingly, I'm told that a lot of the full frame films that come out are family films - are children's films - because they feel that children, particularly, object to the idea of the black space at the top and the bottom. [Editor's Note: Sorry - I couldn't resist adding my two cents on this issue here, because this idea is absurd. Kids are smarter than that. If you ask them, "Do you like those black bars?" of course they'll say no. But if you tell them why they're there, and show that it's much more like what you see in a movie theater, they'll get it. It's about educating them, not treating them like idiots.] Maltin (cont'd): [to Darnell] Now ANTZ was focused on an older audience - a little higher than the tiny tots. The real young audience wasn't sort of your main target audience. Did you do anything different because of that? Darnell: Well, we composed the film with a little room at the top and bottom. We were 1.85, but we went ahead and added that little extra at the top and bottom, so that we could see both the 1.85 and the square aspect ratio. And that accomplished what we needed for Europe, and for television. Fortunately, it wasn't too much of a concern. Maltin: [to the whole panel] Now, are you all video watchers, or is that sort of a dirty word for a director? Do you watch your films on video? Herzog: I might be a rare exception, because sometimes I do watch for professional reasons - for checking out an actor, or something. But, you have to know that I come from Bavaria, and my mother fled with the kids to the most remote mountain valley. So I didn't know that cinema even existed until I was eleven. I didn't know what a telephone was, what a TV was. And strangely enough, I made my first film when I was seventeen. So I did not grow up in the culture of TV, and video - I'm a stray dog here. And I still try to keep away from video. Only for certain reasons, when I have to check out an actor, or I have to catch a film that I might have missed. But that's just for me. I have no objections with video. I like what's out there, especially now with this DVD. Maltin: [to Condon] Bill? Condon: Well, I discovered laserdisc just a few years ago, and it's great to see films in their best transfer, with great new sound - it's almost like the films are opening again. I think it's very exciting. But one thing I want to mention about the whole widescreen thing, is that a big issue for people right now, with this new medium, is this whole 16x9 enhancement thing. When Universal did Gods and Monsters, they did such a great job, and one of the things they did, is to make an anamorphic print, so that when people, in a few years, have widescreen TVs, they push that button and it fills the TV in a high resolution way. It's not that expensive. But I think a lot of people, who are into DVD, are complaining that a lot of the studios are leaving that off the DVDs they're producing now, because again, in three years or whatever, when everyone has widescreen TVs, they can get you to buy the movie again. And that's a problem. It's a simple thing, but it will be interesting to see what happens, because the collectors I think are starting to get savvy to that, and they're staying away from those. Maltin: Interesting. Now do you watch movies regularly in 16x9? Condon: I do, I do. And again, not very many people have those TVs yet in the world, but for me, it's almost like seeing the movie again in the theater. And to me, I know that for Gods and Monsters, I was able to go in and fix a few things on DVD that didn't look good in theaters - fix up opticals, out-of-focus shots, or things like that. So there are films that look really great on it. Maltin: So you did tweak and improve your film technically... Condon: Oh yeah. Maltin: [to Ratner] How about you, Brett? Ratner: Do I watch? Oh, yeah. I have a DVD player in my car and in my van. [lots of audience laughter and big applause] Maltin: [laughing] Are you the guy I was stuck behind on the freeway yesterday? Ratner: Yeah. Probably. But this stuff about - technically, the stuff I wasn't happy with photography-wise about my movie - the contrast of shooting a black man, on a bright day, in an exterior location where you don't have control of the light - there's not a lot of latitude, you know? But now, with the way they transfer things - with the digital telecine - I'm able to take a shot or a scene that I'm not happy with in the theater, that drives me crazy, and correct the skin tone, or brighten him up, or darken him up, or bring the sky up or down. So I'm very proud, and I spent a lot of time on the transfer of Rush Hour, to make sure that it really looked great. And I would go on the Internet, and get the reviews that would come out on the DVD, and see how people liked it. I spent a lot of time technically on it. And I'm so crazy about that - on film, you get all kinds of scratches and dust, and white marks - now, with digital transfers, I can literally paint out every white speck, and all that, and I spent so much time on that. I mean hours - and the studio gets mad, because I spent so much time on the video transfer. But I wanted it to be clean, I wanted it to be perfect. on to page 3 (back to main VSDA '99 menu)
		Site designed for 800 x 600 resolution, using 16M colors and .gif 89a animation. © 1997-2002 The Digital Bits, Inc., All Rights Reserved. billhunt@thedigitalbits.com