RSS
Get this RSS feed

Exclusive Interview: Neal Adams

November 4th, 2009 by Rebecca Harper Editor

If you look up Neal Adams on the Internet, you’ll find that he’s worked with the who’s-who of the comic book world. He’s credited with helping to create some of the modern imagery for DC Comics superheroes like Superman and Batman; he also worked on Marvel’s Avengers, Conan the Barbarian and the X-Men, among others. More recently, he’s been championing motion comics — videos based on illustrations you see in comic books, word-for-word and drawing-for-drawing — as a way for the comic book industry to reach a broader audience and take over the world. Today, Marvel’s motion comic Astonishing X-Men, produced by Adams’ Continuity Studios, made its debut on Hulu. The first series, ‘Gifted,’ is based on the hugely popular graphic novels by Joss Whedon and John Cassaday, so it promises strong characters and, even better, plenty of action.

“At this point in the history of motion comics, ‘Gifted‘ is the very best motion comic book out there,” Adams told us. “There will be some in the future that will be as good if not better, but right now it’s the best one.” It’s the early days of this medium — you can catch a motion comic version of Marvel’s Spider-Woman, Agent of S.W.O.R.D. on Hulu, as well, and we’ll have more chapters from the Astonishing X-Men next month — but Adams thinks there’s much more to come, especially as uses motion comics are used to promote feature films. (He tells us there’s motion comic material for a Predator-like character in the works, but that’s all he can say.) Learn how Adams defines –or rather, doesn’t define — motion comics and get his take on Joss Whedon’s graphic novel talents in Hulu’s exclusive interview below. — Rebecca Harper (), Editor

Hulu: Can you tell us about motion comics and what they are?
Neal Adams:
Well, first I can tell you what they aren’t. They aren’t a replacement for comic books. They are an adjunct to comic books. They are, in some ways for some people, an easier way to read a comic book, because the comic book kind of reads itself. They are not animation. They are not animated like an animated adaptation, which is when you have some designers in Czechoslovakia or Thailand or India draw thousands and thousands of drawings that have to look very similar to the other ones so that the characters can animate, and so they use the least number of lines that they can to create the animation. They’re not computer animation, and they’re not movies, which are adaptations of comic books. Sometimes you can recognize what went on in the comic book in the movie, and sometimes — most of the time — you can’t.
These are the comic books. They are word-for-word, comma-for-comma the writing of the writer. They are line-for -line, drawing-for-drawing the drawings of the artist, except that the words are turned into voices and the drawings have become animated through manipulating them with computers. You know, you can draw a line and you can turn it into rubber on the computer. You can make it move up, you can make it move down; you can turn it into a face, you can do things with it on the computer that is not what an artist does by redrawing it. So the line that’s in the comic book becomes the line that’s in the motion comic. The only difference is you’ve added the dimension of motion so you can watch it happen. It’s a new form. I don’t want to get all high and mighty or anything, but it’s a new form of entertainment that never existed before.

You’ve explained this before, haven’t you?
I’ve explained it before, to people I’ve tried to sell it to at Marvel and DC Comics. We do this kind of thing in advertising. We do, in effect, a motion comic of a commercial that the advertising agency takes out and tests before they spend a lot of money to do the commercial. Sometimes those what used to be called “animatics” are actually better than the finished commercial. So my little company, Continuity, has done that for over 20 years. We have tried to get some folks in the comic books business to give it a try to see whether or not it can be turned into another form of doing it. Well, a whole series of events had to take place for it to happen, but, by golly, it happened. It turns out that Marvel is, as usual, the first one to open the door and try something new.

You’ve been involved with some of the biggest names in comic books — names like Superman, Batman and X-Men. How did you get your start?
I started when people thought that comic books were toilet paper. In America, once we attacked communists, we also then attacked comic books. Comic books, for a long time in America, were considered to be the kind of thing you never wanted to show your kids and you never wanted to read yourself. So there’s been this long climb upward. When I began, everything was pretty much in the doldrums and everyone was telling me, “You don’t want to do comic books because pretty soon — a year or two, maybe three — they’ll be gone.”

I started at a very bad time and, by golly, those of us who persevered and kept on going, we changed the standards as much as we could to make them not so much more adult, but to appeal to a broader audience. Some people say there are certain movies and certain movies that are meant for kids, some are meant for adults, some are meant for everybody. The wonderful thing about comic books is they’re a medium that everyone can understand. We don’t limit the language. Comic books are, in fact — and always have been — the only kind of book that a kid buys with his own money. This is not an insult to children’s books, which I think are wonderful, but children don’t go out and buy children’s books. Their parents do. Kids will take their own money and buy a comic book. They’re also not magazines. A lot of people think of them as magazines, but they’re not. They’re periodicals and books. Magazines make their income from advertising. If you pick up Vogue or whatever magazine you feel like picking up, what you’ll find is 80 percent of the magazine is advertising. Comic books survive on entertainment. They’re like going to the movie. There is some advertising in comic books, thank goodness, but not so much that it gets in the way of the story.

It’s a very weird and unique medium. In fact, I’ve spoken with some French folks who have opinions about America and have opinions about culture. If you scratch a French fellow who is interested in this sort of thing, he will tell you that America is responsible for three forms of art: jazz, musical comedy and, guess what, comic books.

How have you seen the business change recently?
I don’t see that there’s a limit. I think the limit is going to be about quality. One of the amazing things about the Astonishing X-Men that we’ve done is that it’s a motion motion comic as opposed to a cut-out dolls motion comic. It actually has motion to it. There’s a wide variety of motion comics that go from no motion to extreme motion. We’re on the extreme motion end, not on the no motion end. So there’s a great variety of that stuff. It’s available for many reasons. For example, some movies are going to be promoted with motion comics. There’s an educational program that I’m myself involved in with the Disney Corporation doing motion comics about the Holocaust. The Disney Corporation is providing them to schools. There’s going to be five in the first half of the year, basically stories about Mayor LaGuardia in New York, the ship that can’t find a port to let the refugees off, Ann Frank, things like that; really significant stories done in a form that, like motion comics, are very palatable and very, very interesting. You just don’t get bored. That’s not to say that educational things are boring but, you know, it has to do with the “boree” rather than the “borer.” The “boree” is sometimes more easily bored with one form or another. It’s very hard to get bored when you’re given good and interesting information in a form like this.

It almost takes a certain kind of person to read a comic book, to be a comic book geek. But it’s very easy, once you see the video, for you to then turn to the comic book and go, “Oh, I get it. I may read this very quickly, but it may have more meaning.” And so they go back and they look at it with a different point of view. In fact, one of the things that we do when we show people Astonishing X-Men, is I put copies of the graphic novel in the room with people as I show it to them. As they’re watching, they reach for the graphic novel to see “Is that in there? I didn’t get that from that. What is that? Was that really in there?” And they go ahead and read it and look at it to see if we were really following the comic book, or there was some nuance that they missed, this is really good artwork, or oh, that’s the guy who wrote Buffy the Vampire Slayer. So the connection is being made in a very important way to people who aren’t necessarily comic book geeks. I think that’s what happening here, and not the way a movie does it. You can go to an X-Men movie and never pick up an X-Men comic book, because it’s an entertaining movie, and it’s never exactly the comic book. It’s very hard to look at these and not pick up the graphic novel.

You referred to Joss Whedon of Buffy fame, who also wrote this “Gifted” storyline for Astonishing X-Men. Can tell us what it was like working with him?
We would have preferred that Joss to stop by and give us some input, but of course he’s been busy working on Dollhouse. On the other hand, I’ve done some directing for commercials and stuff, and from the point of view of my directing this thing, he has a better economy of words since he’s used to writing for film and television. He knows when to stop having this person talk because all you’re watching is talking heads. He knows what his limits are and he knows how to use them. He knows how to cut back-and-forth between characters, because he’s so used to doing this. He’s the very best person to be first out with a really good motion comic. I guess there may be a better script writer out there, but is there someone more used to the form of both comic books and film? I don’t think there is. He was the perfect guy for us to work with.

Can you give us a little taste of what to expect with this series?
First of all, “Gifted” is one of Marvel’s best series of graphic novels. It has an awful lot to do with the potential of having superpowers and what the inevitable result can be. You could put another culture in danger. I don’t want to tell people where this culture is, or what kind of danger it represents, but what is known is that one of the X-Men is going to present such a disaster to another culture, and that culture has to go and try to find that X-Men and do away with him, or do something to change the history that’s going to unfold. So you have a story that starts at one time and goes back in time and starts to evolve forward while you’re watching the story of the X-Men, so you get a real classic tragedy in comic book form.

Of course, one of the things about Joss, if you watch Buffy or his other stuff, is that he likes action. You’re not going to turn too many pages before you get to some big knock-down, drag-out fight. Of course, we love that. You’ve got guys going behind the computers going, “Who’s going to handle that thing where the guy bashes the guy and throws him through the wall and they end up on the other side of the wall and then crash into the third wall?” And I say, “You want to do that? Oh, OK, I guess. Hmm…yes, make me a cup of coffee and I’ll let you do it.” People just love that. We have some people who are very strong in the soap opera sense. I’m not saying that girls are more sensitive than guys, but I will say that our best soap opera person is a girl, and she milks the emotion out of the characters using the animation tears coming to the eyes and going down her face.

What’s so wonderful is that we can pass these pieces out and look for people’s strengths to see how they handle that particular scene. You wouldn’t think that handling drawings and creating animation would do that but, by golly, it does. If you watch this little epic unfold, I think you’ll see what I’m saying is true. You’ll get a lot out of it drama wise, and you’ll forget that you’re watching drawings move. You’ll think you’re watching things happen.

Crash Course: “Greek”

November 3rd, 2009 by Rebecca Harper Editor

Drama abounds at Cyprus Rhodes University, the fictional college campus where ABC Family’s Greek takes place. Pledges steal their big sisters’ boyfriends, sororities try to pay their way to the top of the Pan-Hellenic rankings, and best friends come to blows over girls and fraternity allegiances. (Missed any of this drama? Catch up on Hulu — we have Seasons 1, 2 and most of 3.) So far on Season 3, roommates Rusty and Dale — the resident science geeks — are struggling for a research grant, and it’s costing them their friendship; Zeta Beta Zeta queen bee Casey poured her heart out to her ex-boyfriend Cappie, only to be rejected; and bitter rivals Evan and Cappie — former best friends who’ve both dated Casey — are friends again, thanks to a secret underground society. In last night’s episode, “Friend or Foe,” the fall semester is winding down, and the mid-season finale (the show returns in 2010) is full of fraternity pranks, romance, singing and dancing, and — we’re not making this up — a BattleBots showdown between Rusty and Dale.

“There’s a lot of stuff going on. Some of the scenes near the end of the episode were really fun to shoot. It’s an action-packed episode with a lot of drama. It’s actually kind of sad, too,” Scott Michael Foster (who plays Cappie) told us. “There’s a lot of stuff going and emotions are high. It’s always cool to shoot scenes like that, because we always want to make sure we have good finales for the audience.”

Now that Cappie’s back together with Casey, he has to break the news to a possibly less-than-supportive Evan. “When we were reading the scripts and finding out where they were going to go with this storyline, we wanted for them to all stay friends and be happy,” he said, “but drama has to come from somewhere, so it’s definitely hard for the three of them to have a relationship. You’re going to see how it all affects them in the finale.”

Ready to see what happens? Here’s the full episode.

Rebecca Harper ()
Hulu’s ZBZ Wannabe

Last comment: about 18 hours ago 2 Comments

New Series: Martin Yan’s Hong Kong

November 2nd, 2009 by Rebecca Harper Editor

Looking for a quick international getaway that doesn’t require a trip to the airport? Check out Martin Yan’s Hong Kong and get to know the flavors of this world-class island city. In each episode, the congenial “Yan Can Cook” chef shares some of his favorite places in Hong Kong with the Hulu audience — and along the way, he and his chef friends share their favorite recipes. Best of all, cooking demonstrations and travel tips are served with a healthy amount of Chef Yan’s trademark wit. We had the opportunity to speak to Yan about his Hong Kong adventures by phone last week; check out our conversation below. — Rebecca Harper (), Editor

Hulu: First, can you tell us why you decided to do a series about Hong Kong?
Chef Yan:
Well, if anybody has traveled to Hong Kong, it’s a city that not only never sleeps, but it never slows down. Hong Kong has always been considered the gourmet paradise and the Mecca of great foods. Being an international city and colonized by the British for over 100 years, Hong Kong is the crossroads of all the great foods. You have some of the best Western restaurants, French restaurants, Italian restaurants, Russian restaurants, Southeast Asian restaurants, and you also have the best Chinese restaurants. They actually refer to Hong Kong as the “fragrant harbor.” There are more restaurants per capita in Hong Kong than anywhere else in the world.

How did you decide which dishes and which parts of Hong Kong to focus on for this series, since Hong Kong is such a diverse large city?
I actually trained in Hong Kong. When I left Guangzhou, China when I was 13, I actually spent six years in Hong Kong working in restaurants. And after I graduated from college, I went back to Hong Kong to work. I worked for a food magazine, so I have a lot of fond memories, and I have some favorites of Hong Kong. Normally what I do in the Hong Kong Series, basically, is to feature the uniqueness of Hong Kong and what makes Hong Kong so different. Each show actually has a theme — for instance, bamboo. In Hong Kong, when they build high rises, they don’t use steel racks. They use bamboo scaffolding, all the way up to the 30th or 40th floor, so it’s very, very unique. You see people climbing up and down the bamboo scaffolding. And then the whole theme is on bamboo, talking about the use of bamboo in China and Southeast Asia. We talk about using bamboo shoots, cooking bamboo shoots, when whole bamboo is used, and when the bamboo leaf is used to wrap Chinese tamales in dim sum restaurants. Each one is about what makes Hong Kong so unique.

In another program, we talk about water. Hong Kong is an island, a peninsula island that is all surrounded by water. You water everywhere: you see deep water, you see the bay, the harbor, and then you see seafood restaurants everywhere. There’s an abundance of seafood from all over the world, not only the surrounding area. The whole series is about life, food, lifestyle, arts and the excitement, and what makes Hong Kong so unique.

Which episodes are your favorites?
They’re all my favorites. Otherwise, I wouldn’t put them in the series. I’m a world traveler. Normally my focus is not just on featuring one subject matter and one theme, but also to give people a broad understanding and an introduction to a great city. You see London, Paris, Tokyo, and New York and Los Angeles… Hong Kong is probably if not the most, then one of the most exciting cities in the world. You ask anybody who has visited Hong Kong, and they never forget all the excitement, all the energy. You go to New York – -and I love New York, I love London — but you only see part of New York, or part of London. You only see the theater district or Times Square, a certain area that never sleeps. But in Hong Kong, the entire city never sleeps. If you’ve ever been to Hong Kong, you’ll notice that it’s not just part of Hong Kong, but the entire city of Hong Kong is always bustling. There’s 7 to 8 million people living in a place that’s smaller than Chicago.

How often do you travel to Hong Kong?
I go there eight times years. I just landed, and I’m going back there in November and December. I do shows in China and Hong Kong, and I bring a lot professional chefs. I bring a leisure, gourmet tour as well as professional chefs to Hong Kong and China.

And why did you decide to put this series on Hulu?
Hulu is a great medium to reach a good audience. People who are interested in information, interested in entertainment would be browsing around Hulu and watch the programs. It’s also a new medium and excited. I’m very excited to partner with Hulu, and hopefully this is not the end, but the beginning.

I read that you’ve hosted over 3,000 cooking shows …
Yeah, I’ve done more cooking shows than most people. Not necessarily all people, but most people. I started doing the cooking show in 1978, 1979, for 30 years now.

How do you keep finding new ideas?
Well, I travel a great deal. I’m passionate about food and I love to eat, and I have a lot of friends everywhere. Everywhere I go, people always give me the best. Because of that, they inspire me. Being a guy that loves to eat — some people love tennis, some people love hiking, some people love swimming or surfing. I happen to love to eat and love to cook. Also, when you eat different food, like Cuban food, or Russian food, or Burmese food, you also understand the culture and the backdrop of the people. It’s a fascinating thing, a study of anthropology, of history and lifestyle when you go to a restaurant. Like when you go to an Indian restaurant, you see the decor. You go to a Thai restaurant and you see the wood carvings and the embroidery. You go to a Vietnamese or Cambodian restaurant, you see something. So the restaurant is a reflection of the culture and heritage. Just like people collecting stamps, you can study a lot about the people and their history. Food and restaurants are the same. Food is an expression of the chef and the owner. It’s how they want to present themselves and what kind of target audience they want to reach. For me, it’s always a cultural and culinary journey when you go into a restaurant, and it’s the same thing when I travel and when bring the program to people. I constantly learn from the chef, from the people, from home cooks. You cannot possibly know all the cuisine and the culture in the world, so by traveling, I bring all my memories and all my experiences with the people to the audience. I hope Hulu will continue to be in the forefront of bringing all this information and excitement and entertainment to people.

And when you’re at home, are you the one that cooks?
I always cook for myself. People always ask my wife, “Who cooks at home?” My wife always points her finger to me. When I’m home, I cook. I have three refrigerators and two sinks, and a big counter and a professional cooktop in my house. Everything is given to me by GE Monogram, so I can cook at home. I entertain a lot at home. When I’m home, I invite all my friends and neighbors to come and have dinner. A lot of times, I ask everybody to get involved, though. I normally cook one or two items, and they bring the dessert and salad and everything. Food and cooking brings everyone together. I hope my program on Hulu will bring more excitement and fun to the people that love food and travel, because all my programs are a combination of traveling and food and cooking.

Independent America: A Q&A with Filmmaker Hanson Hosein

November 2nd, 2009 by Rebecca Harper Editor

In Independent America, husband and wife journalists Hanson Hosein and his wife, Heather Hughes, packed up their car (and their dog) and traveled the U.S. But their cross-country road trip doesn’t take place in chain motels and interstate highways. Instead, the couple searches for independent businesses — mom and pop stores, local restaurants, and family-owned inns — off of the country’s more scenic secondary highways. Along the way, they discover fiercely independent communities who are against chains and big-box retailers, an issue, it seems, that unites conservatives and liberals alike. Below, Hulu spoke to filmmaker Hosein about their journey. — Rebecca Harper (), Editor

Hulu: Can you give us a summary of the film?
Filmmaker Hanson Hosein:
The big picture is that it’s about what I call the rising insurgency against corporate chains in American small towns and cities across the Heartland. The smaller story is of a road trip my wife and I took across the United States to document that, by taking only secondary highways to see what we thought was a more authentic view of America, before the corporate chains took over, and by only doing business with independent businesses along the way.

What were some of the more surprising things you discovered while you took this trip?
I think the most surprising thing is that this issue transcends politics and the standard conservative-liberal divide we keep hearing about in the United States, which is obviously quite true with many other issues. But we were in Midwestern towns in Nebraska or Wyoming, and these are conservative areas, but they also had the same concerns; they just call it something different. In Seattle, they call it sustainability; in these places they call it conservation. They’re just as concerned about these sort of concentrations of power by large corporations, which they don’t trust as much as they trust their neighbors in terms of how they do business.

One of the reviews about this documentary points out that you aren’t actually anti-Wal-Mart, that you actually provide equal time to their company. What’s your perspective on Wal-Mart?
It’s changed over the years. Because we come from a traditional journalism background — we both used to work at NBC — we take this fair and balanced thing very seriously. It was very important for us to actually get Wal-Mart in the film. They get 800 requests a week — that’s what they told us — for interviews. They looked at our website while we were doing our trip, and they said “Well, they obviously have a point of view that’s critical of us, but they’re giving us fair opportunity to talk.” So they decided they would give us some time. They gave us free access to their stores and their advertising, and there were no conditions whatsoever. So my thought on Wal-Mart as a company is, you know, I’m concerned still about the amount of power they have in the community and some of the things they’ve done in the past, overturning what communities have decided in terms of how they want to run their neighborhoods. On the other hand, I think the fact that Wal-Mart has been very open about some of the mistakes they’ve made along the way doesn’t necessarily endear me to them, but I believe in giving them a fair opportunity to state their case. It’s been said that a book can be written about Wal-Mart and all the bad things they’ve done, and a book can be written about all the good things they’ve done. Especially in this downturn, there’s a sense that that Wal-Mart is not necessarily the bad guy as much as they had been in the past.

You mentioned that you traveled the country with your wife, Heather. What was that like for the two of you?
[Laughs] It was tough, because we had both worked in television news traditionally. We both had real jobs. This was this crazy flight of fancy we had … We tried to get PBS and Discovery Channel and these other broadcasters to support us, and nobody did. We had this incredible pressure to do this story anyway, even though we didn’t have a major supporter. We had a partner, Tom Powers from Open Door in Toronto; he’d give us some funds to do this. But this was like driving into oblivion, not knowing whether we’d have something to show and whether anybody would care about what we were doing. Doing it was a little scary, but going out with your wife and your dog, there’s some moral support there — but it’s also like you’re facing every day, like “Gee, I hope I’m not leading my family into ruin on this creative urge that may not lead to anything.” It was tough, and you have the usual squabbles that happen between husband and wife: the husband never wants to check directions, and the wife always wants to stop and ask for directions — there’s a moment of pride there. But amazingly, we got along pretty well given all the stress of what the trip was about.

How did you determine your route? Did you have certain towns you wanted to hit, or was it all a “flight of fancy?”
I used to work at NBC covering breaking news around the world, so I’m really into covering things organically and letting the story tell itself. On the other hand, I knew that we couldn’t just take a chance and just close our eyes and point at a map. So we did some research before leaving — where we thought some of the hot spots might be, and we decided that we would visit some of those along the way. But what happened –this was a few years ago, before even YouTube had launched — we decided that as we were making our trip, we would share our video and share our thoughts on our blog with the world. As we kept going, more and more people kept following us, and we’d get covered by NPR stations and local newspapers. All of a sudden, people started sending us requests and recommendations of where we should go and said [they'd] put us up for the night. Fifty percent of the trip was very serendipitous based on that interaction with the audience. I’d say that the best half of the film was actually done through improvisation from these suggestions.

You created a follow-up film where you go to New Orleans. Can you tell us about that, and why a film about New Orleans was important?
We were actually supposed to go to New Orleans on the first trip. This was in 2005, and we got a call from Wal-Mart saying “We will talk to you,” so we had to rush to get to Arkansas, where Wal-Mart has their headquarters. We were thinking, “Oh, we’ll get there sometime.” Six weeks later, Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans. We’d always been told that New Orleans was the classic independent American city, where they had a really strong local economy and local culture, and they didn’t like big-box stores in the city. We knew that was going to change after Katrina. The second film was kind of like a lost chapter of Independent America. It’s my attempt to capture what the city was like before, and how it was actually small businesses that came back immediately after Katrina. I mean, I heard stories of people opening up the day after the floods to help their neighborhoods, and how vital that is to a community after a disaster like that. So that’s the story of that second film. There are some concerns about how city officials have been favoring big-box stores like Home Depot with tax incentives while not giving the same incentives to small businesses. It’s very much the same themes as the first film, but it’s really focused on one community right after a major disaster.

And what are you working on these days?
Right now I’m a professor at the University of Washington in Seattle. And funnily enough, all the stuff that I did for that first film — creating your own content, telling your own stories, using engaged community members to help spread the word about what you’re doing — is pretty much what I teach now. It’s like the future of digital media and communication and social media. I’m also working on a book on storytelling in the 21st century. Independent America is going to be the main theme to it, which is essentially that if you ever want to cut through all the noise — everybody can communicate these days — you have to tell a really good story and you have to find a way to connect with your community using these different platforms to have them engage with you, kind of like we did in having them tell us what the second half of the story should be. That’s basically a book on the future of storytelling.

Thanks so much for your time — good luck with these projects!

Now Streaming: ‘April Showers’

October 20th, 2009 by Rebecca Harper Editor

NOTE: This film will be available for streaming until Monday, Oct 26, 2009 at midnight PST.
=======================
Last spring, Hulu spoke to Andrew Robinson, the writer and director of the new film April Showers. The film, which chronicles the April 20, 1999 shootings at Columbine High School in Colorado, is an extremely personal project for Robinson: he was a senior at Columbine that year. His ultimate goal for this film is to empower kids to make a difference, to be proactive and get their voices heard to prevent something like this from happening again. Robinson sought input from school administrators, school boards and teachers to create a film that could reach a wide audience, prompting conversation at home and in the classroom. Below, he shares his insight into the movie, which is now available on Hulu. [Note: the following interview originally appeared in the discussions area for the movie trailer on Hulu.] — Rebecca Harper (), Editor

Hulu: You attended Columbine High and were at school the day of the shootings, so you clearly bring an insider’s perspective to April Showers. Can you talk about that? Where were you when the shooting began?
Robinson:
Well, I was in school and a senior at Columbine on that day. We broke for lunch and, instead of going to the cafeteria for lunch, which I rarely ever did, I went up to the computer lab, which is kind of dead-center in the building. It’s kind of a study hall thing, and I was hanging out with a couple of my friends. They were editing some video projects that they had and I was just there for a second opinion. Apparently the shooting had begun outside in the student parking lot, which is behind several layers of concrete from where we were, so we didn’t hear it. The fire alarm was pulled and you immediately think “We’re two weeks from graduation, it has to be a student prank.” We walked out into the main hallway, which was empty, and within a few moments a whole horde of students came running up the hallway towards us, screaming and yelling “There’s a gun, there’s a gun!” and “They’re shooting people,” stuff like that. So we ducked back into the computer lab and kids were putting themselves into closets and cabinets and hiding under desks. My friends and I just didn’t feel comfortable there. We didn’t want to be in a room if whatever was out there came in there. We were going to be in real trouble, so we left the computer lab and found a way out of the building without encountering any direct gunfire or anything like that.

Is the film told from your perspective?
The film follows about six different points of view. You witness the event primarily through the eyes of the main character, Sean. However, with him as he’s going through the event, are two, three, four other people that, in various stages of the day, kind of get separated and branch off so they have their own unique experiences, and certain experiences that came before the shooting happened, that influence the things that they do during the day. We’ve got some other characters that don’t intertwine with the three main storylines, but you go through it through their eyes and then, at the end, how they all come out the other side — some do, some don’t. The film is not about the shooting. When we were discussing how to film it, I was very adamant that I didn’t really want to stage the shooting in the film, but I knew that I needed to, to some degree, in order for the audience to take the journey with the characters in order for them to understand the rawness of the emotion that they’re going to see onscreen, because that’s one thing the general public doesn’t really see in real life when the news media sweeps in and covers these things. They tend to cover the live pictures of it unfolding, or just after it’s unfolded with a couple of sound bites. Then they bring in experts, but you don’t really see the two dozen, three dozen kids having impromptu gatherings in basements trying to figure out where their lives go from here, or some people having backlash against others, that whole thing. I needed them to see just enough, just enough of the horror to be in the position where our characters and the audience go through the same kind of journey. What you get out of it and how it affects you and how you look to tomorrow is different to each individual, just like in the film.

Was it hard for you to revisit these scenarios? How did this project affect you?
I couldn’t have done this project three years ago, four years ago, five years ago. I’m in a really good place now, emotionally, mentally, everything with regards to that day. I harbor no ill will about the shooting. It is that day, and I’ve come to grips with it.

What was really difficult for me was having to put other people through it, even in a make-believe film sense. But we used 1,500 real high school students. Having to stage these events and talk them through them and get them into that mindset, to put them there and to watch their reaction… after a while, people on the crew were saying “These extras are really good actors,” but I said “I don’t think they’re acting. I think they’re feeling it. What you’re seeing is genuine.” It was hard to all of a sudden be a spectator to this because I went through it and wasn’t able to see it. Now I’m orchestrating it and being a spectator, watching people as it plays out this thing in my life. That was difficult because, I know when we came to town and were looking for extras, everyone was like, “Oh, I’m gonna be in a movie.” But it’s not a Zac Efron movie. A lot of kids, the first day they’re on the set were like, “Oh, we’re in a basement… it looks like a house party scene!” Meanwhile, I’m telling them “No one’s talking. You’re all fixated on the TV.” Then I start describing the images that are on the TV, which the audience never sees because their faces tell you the whole story. Just watching them go there and imagine all of this… It was difficult to have to do that to kids. At the same time, as we kept filming, you could see a bond growing. You could see people reaching out to one another. We had several different schools participate and so it was just really cool at the end of it. You saw these kids go through a transformation without having to lose friends to do it.

Last comment: Oct 29th 2009 1 Comment