Gareth Edwards’ “Monsters” Mash

Gareth Edwards’ “Monsters” Mash (photo)

Posted by on

For a first-time filmmaker, there are worse things that could happen than the fear of getting kidnapped. At least, this is what I surmised when Gareth Edwards gave me a roll of the eyes when he thought I was about to ask about the budget of “Monsters,” the micro-budget sci-fi film that has become one of the year’s most talked-about debuts after premiering in March at SXSW amidst rumors that it cost a mere $15,000.

Not that Edwards would be reluctant to talk about it. Right now, he appears ready to talk about nearly anything, brimming with an enthusiasm that’s hard to come by — even by the standards of those who know they’ve pulled off their first magic trick — but money was hardly what was on Edwards’ mind as he backpacked across Costa Rica, Guatemala, Belize, Mexico and Texas with actors Whitney Able and Scoot McNairy, a boom operator and a camera.

While there are roughly 250 special effects shots in “Monsters,” of downed helicopters, of trees infected with fluorescent pods, and of the octopus-like creatures that threaten the lives of Americans Samantha and Andrew (Able and McNairy) as they try to find safe passage through Central America after an alien invasion, the most special effect of Edwards’ film has nothing to do with computer graphics or camera trickery. Instead, it is the vitality of shooting in areas rarely seen outside of National Geographic back issues as a springboard for a tale that feeds on both the joy of the region’s indigenous cultures and the dread that as societies they’ve been left behind.

In a genre that’s known for subtext, the fact that Edwards brings these things to the surface is only one of the refreshing things about his debut, which doesn’t shy away from showing its “Monsters,” whether it’s the full glory of his CG creations or the random ferry operator who exploits the Americans out of a higher fare for their travel.

09052010_GarethEdwardsMonsters.jpgFortunately, Edwards knows what scares an audience more than what to be afraid of himself, asking complete strangers from the area to interact with McNairy and Able on their journey and dealing with the harsh terrain of the jungle, only to come home to the daunting task of waking up every morning to do every CG shot for the film. (“Computers are like dogs – they can smell fear,” says Edwards.) On the eve of facing an even more intimidating task — walking the red carpet for “Monsters”‘ premiere at this year’s Toronto Film Festival — Edwards talked about the evolution of special effects, how he turned nearby gunmen into production value and the cheap version of “Avatar.”

With the limitless potential of CG special effects, it seems like we keep getting the same movie. How did you make yours different?

I think the background being in computer graphics is you just become bored with it and I love computer graphics — there are some things that are so much easier to do in the computer than they are to create in front of the camera, so it is an important tool and you do need them, but I think also people rely on them for its own sake. They don’t sit there and picture okay, what would be a good film. Okay, how the hell do we do that? A lot of people sit down and go, okay, we can do anything we want in the computer. What’s not been done? Let’s try and do that instead and it’s not necessarily a good idea to do that because it’s not using computers in the right way.

09052010_Monsters2.jpgIt seems it took awhile for computers to catch up with your ambitions. When did you know this would be possible?

I kept trying to pull this off since 1997, not this film, but I bought a computer after I graduated film school and tried to learn CGI because I just figured it would be the future of filmmaking. Every year, I’d have a little pet project, not necessarily a movie, but something and it just was never good enough or never quite how I imagined it. It was like those embarrassing short films and experiments that you want to hide and delete and never have anyone see. I just kept trying and trying and I kind of get back to a point where I think why didn’t I do this earlier? You look back and think well, I actually couldn’t have done this five years ago for a few reasons.

The main one was a camcorder that you can run around with in your hand only recently have these special adapters that allow it to look like 35mm film, so you can have that narrow depth of field and look beautiful and cinematic, but still like very cheap and you can film for hours on end without it being expensive. And before that, computer graphics were really slow.

It’s very easy to think computers were always the way they are today, but you forget how slow and rubbish they were five years ago. I remember how long it took the software took — a day [for] every time you moved a frame forward and it would like slowly update after a few seconds — whereas now with high definition, I can play around with it in real time. It’s very fluid, and thank God, the technology’s at a point now where I don’t look like such an idiot as I did before when I used to try these things.

It’s equally ambitious to set your first film in Central America and Mexico when you’re not familiar with the region and I’ve heard stories of bigger film shoots that have shied away from the area for fear of kidnapping. Had you been warned?

09052010_Monsters3.jpgEverybody in the film in the daylight that’s got a gun is a real policeman and what happened was I was filming and I noticed the guys with guns, I was thinking this is great. This really helps our film — brilliant, get them in shot. And in another scene, I’d realize it was the same guy and I’d be like “Hang on, why is this guy also here? He was also at the other place.” The producer said, “No, no, no, they’re our bodyguards. The government has supplied them for free, so we don’t get kidnapped.” So you think oh shit, okay, that’s how dangerous it is here.

It’s funny because whilst we were there, all kinds of crazy stuff happened — there was a shooting outside the hotel, there was a prison break and they decapitated some prisoners, there was a week before we arrived into town, they machine-gunned everyone in this café. So when we arrived, there was these coffin protests in the street and all this stuff was going on and I was constantly shitting myself the whole film, but it was never about these things. I was constantly shitting myself that maybe I hadn’t got enough shots. Maybe something was out of focus. Maybe the film is rubbish, you know what I mean? That’s what was worrying me.

Watch More

Bro and Tell

BFFs And Night Court For Sports

Bromance and Comeuppance On Two New Comedy Crib Series

Posted by on

“Silicon Valley meets Girls meets black male educators with lots of unrealized potential.”

That’s how Carl Foreman Jr. and Anthony Gaskins categorize their new series Frank and Lamar which joins Joe Schiappa’s Sport Court in the latest wave of new series available now on IFC’s Comedy Crib. To better acquaint you with the newbies, we went right to the creators for their candid POVs. And they did not disappoint. Here are snippets of their interviews:

Frank and Lamar


IFC: How would you describe Frank and Lamar to a fancy network executive you met in an elevator?
Carl: Best bros from college live and work together teaching at a fancy Manhattan private school, valiantly trying to transition into a more mature phase of personal and professional life while clinging to their boyish ways.

IFC: And to a friend of a friend you met in a bar?
Carl: The same way, slightly less coherent.

Anthony: I’d probably speak about it with much louder volume, due to the bar which would probably be playing the new Kendrick Lamar album. I might also include additional jokes about Carl, or unrelated political tangents.

Carl: He really delights in randomly slandering me for no reason. I get him back though. Our rapport on the page, screen, and in real life, comes out of a lot of that back and forth.

IFC: In what way is Frank and Lamar a poignant series for this moment in time?
Carl: It tells a story I feel most people aren’t familiar with, having young black males teach in a very affluent white world, while never making it expressly about that either. Then in tackling their personal lives, we see these three-dimensional guys navigate a pivotal moment in time from a perspective I feel mainstream audiences tend not to see portrayed.

Anthony: I feel like Frank and Lamar continues to push the envelope within the genre by presenting interesting and non stereotypical content about people of color. The fact that this show brought together so many talented creative people, from the cast and crew to the producers, who believe in the project, makes the work that much more intentional and truthful. I also think it’s pretty incredible that we got to employ many of our friends!

Sport Court

Sport Court gavel

IFC: How would you describe Sport Court to a fancy network executive you met in an elevator?
Joe: SPORT COURT follows Judge David Linda, a circuit court judge assigned to handle an ad hoc courtroom put together to prosecute rowdy fan behavior in the basement of the Hartford Ultradome. Think an updated Night Court.

IFC: How would you describe Sport Court to drunk friend of a friend you met in a bar?
Joe: Remember when you put those firecrackers down that guy’s pants at the baseball game? It’s about a judge who works in a court in the stadium that puts you in jail right then and there. I know, you actually did spend the night in jail, but imagine you went to court right that second and didn’t have to get your brother to take off work from GameStop to take you to your hearing.

IFC: Is there a method to your madness when coming up with sports fan faux pas?
Joe: I just think of the worst things that would ruin a sporting event for everyone. Peeing in the slushy machine in open view of a crowd seemed like a good one.

IFC: Honestly now, how many of the fan transgressions are things you’ve done or thought about doing?
Joe: I’ve thought about ripping out a whole row of chairs at a theater or stadium, so I would have my own private space. I like to think of that really whenever I have to sit crammed next to lots of people. Imagine the leg room!

Check out the full seasons of Frank and Lamar and Sport Court now on IFC’s Comedy Crib.

Watch More

Millennial Wisdom

Charles Speaks For Us All

Get to know Charles, the social media whiz of Brockmire.

Posted by on

He may be an unlikely radio producer Brockmire, but Charles is #1 when it comes to delivering quips that tie a nice little bow on the absurdity of any given situation.

Charles also perfectly captures the jaded outlook of Millennials. Or at least Millennials as mythologized by marketers and news idiots. You know who you are.

Played superbly by Tyrel Jackson Williams, Charles’s quippy nuggets target just about any subject matter, from entry-level jobs in social media (“I plan on getting some experience here, then moving to New York to finally start my life.”) to the ramifications of fictional celebrity hookups (“Drake and Taylor Swift are dating! Albums y’all!”). But where he really nails the whole Millennial POV thing is when he comments on America’s second favorite past-time after type II diabetes: baseball.

Here are a few pearls.

On Baseball’s Lasting Cultural Relevance

“Baseball’s one of those old-timey things you don’t need anymore. Like cursive. Or email.”

On The Dramatic Value Of Double-Headers

“The only thing dumber than playing two boring-ass baseball games in one day is putting a two-hour delay between the boring-ass games.”

On Sartorial Tradition

“Is dressing badly just a thing for baseball, because that would explain his jacket.”

On Baseball, In A Nutshell

“Baseball is a f-cked up sport, and I want you to know it.”

Learn more about Charles in the behind-the-scenes video below.

And if you were born before the late ’80s and want to know what the kids think about Baseball, watch Brockmire Wednesdays at 10P on IFC.

Watch More

Crown Jules

Amanda Peet FTW on Brockmire

Amanda Peet brings it on Brockmire Wednesday at 10P on IFC.

Posted by on
GIFS via Giphy

On Brockmire, Jules is the unexpected yin to Jim Brockmire’s yang. Which is saying a lot, because Brockmire’s yang is way out there. Played by Amanda Peet, Jules is hard-drinking, truth-spewing, baseball-loving…everything Brockmire is, and perhaps what he never expected to encounter in another human.

“We’re the same level of functional alcoholic.”

But Jules takes that commonality and transforms it into something special: a new beginning. A new beginning for failing minor league baseball team “The Frackers”, who suddenly about-face into a winning streak; and a new beginning for Brockmire, whose life gets a jumpstart when Jules lures him back to baseball. As for herself, her unexpected connection with Brockmire gives her own life a surprising and much needed goose.

“You’re a Goddamn Disaster and you’re starting To look good to me.”

This palpable dynamic adds depth and complexity to the narrative and pushes the series far beyond expected comedy. See for yourself in this behind-the-scenes video (and brace yourself for a unforgettable description of Brockmire’s genitals)…

Want more about Amanda Peet? She’s all over the place, and has even penned a recent self-reflective piece in the New York Times.

And of course you can watch the Jim-Jules relationship hysterically unfold in new episodes of Brockmire, every Wednesday at 10PM on IFC.

Watch More
Powered by ZergNet