By Iain Blair
Aussie director Craig Gillespie is well-known for his sharp and offbeat comedy sensibility, on display in such films as Lars and the Real Girl and I, Tonya. Those gifts are now showcased in Disney’s Cruella, the live-action film starring Emma Stone as the legendary cartoon villainess Cruella de Vil. Inspired by Disney’s 1961 animated film 101 Dalmatians and now set in the punk era of ’70s London, Cruella is an origin story and the tale of how a gifted young girl evolved into the stylishly vengeful Cruella de Vil.
Director Craig Gillespie
Gillespie assembled a team that included DP Nicolas Karakatsanis, editor Tatiana Riegel, music supervisor Susan Jacobs, VFX supervisor Max Wood and composer Nicholas Britell.
I recently talked with Gillespie, whose other credits include Million Dollar Arm, United State of Tara and Fright Night, about making the film, VFX and his love of post. Editor Tatiana Riegel joined the conversation.
This was visually ambitious. Can you talk about the VFX?
We had over 1,850 VFX shots — a huge amount. Our VFX supervisor, Max Wood, did an amazing job, and he pays such great attention to every detail. He was on set every day, and that made my life much easier. MPC did the VFX and Clear Angle Studios and 4DMax did the 3D scanning. And the crazy thing is, despite the difficulties, all the VFX are pretty invisible.
Dealing with all the dogs must have been a big challenge?
It was. We had a lot of trained dogs on set, but we knew it would be very difficult in long scenes with live dogs, so we ended up creating CG versions of all three of The Baroness’ dalmatians as well as [dogs] Buddy and Wink. There was a lot of mixing CG with live action, which is very hard, as they both have to look completely identical. And we used far more CG than first planned, even for a lot of very detailed close-ups and slo-mo shots —and even shots of the drool. For scenes like the grooming shop, we shot live-action dogs and then replaced their heads when they had to growl and then chase Wink. All this CG work was an incredibly laborious process, blocking the dogs and their movements, sculpting it all and finding the behavioral nuances so it all looked completely real and natural.
It was definitely the most difficult VFX stuff in the film. But there were other challenges, like the whole parachute ending, which we completely redesigned in post. Originally, it was this dress that opened up like a parachute, but it felt like it defied gravity too much, and it just didn’t work. So once we got into post, we did a lot of R&D and reworked it all.
How much previz or postviz did you do?
Not much. We did some for the scenes with the dogs and falling off the cliffs, but there certainly weren’t 1,850 previz shots going on, and a lot of the shots were in real settings; we composited in all the elements we needed for scenes like the warehouse.
How tough was it shooting so many London locations?
It was an unbelievably ambitious schedule, and we shot over 40 locations and did something like over 2,600 setups in 65 days. As my AD pointed out, we were lighting and shooting a setup every 25 minutes. We also shot at Shepperton and had a very efficient crew. We were very well-prepared, so we were able to move very fast.
You reunited with your I, Tonya DP Nicolas Karakatsanis, and you gave the film two distinct looks. Can you talk about that decision?
The idea was to create two different worlds and shoot them using two different formats. So for Cruella’s world, we shot on 35mm with quite a bit of hand-held, and then in post we worked on the color and added a bit of film grain for a grittier, more ’70s punk look and feel. Then for the more refined world of The Baroness, we shot it all on 65mm, which is a much wider format and far richer in terms of what you capture. With wider lenses in 65mm, you also get more straight lines, which echoed her world, and it’s more uniform and rigid.
Where did you do the post?
Because of COVID, I did it all from home here in LA on my laptop. Three times a week, we’d conference and go through hours and hours of shots and notes and revisions. It was very intense. You’d look at just one shot a dozen times before you’d finalize it. I cut the film remotely as well. It was such a different process, but I found it quite productive, as you cut out all the travel time and can just go from working with your editor to looking at VFX shots instantly. I got quite used to it, and I’d be happy to post like this again. Obviously, you want to see the finals projected in a theater, but up till that point, it’s great posting remotely, I think. Although working on computers is more unforgiving, as it’s so sharp.
Do you like the post process?
I really love it, and we spent a whole year on post, although a year’s a very long time, and by the end, you’re pretty tired of it. All the editorial is the most enjoyable part of the whole filmmaking process for me, and I love exploring the material and finding the film and then dealing with the pace and tone and rhythm and so on. It’s the most creative part for me.
The film was edited by your long-time editor Tatiana Riegel. What’s the process like?
Yeah, we’ve worked together for some 16 years and done six movies together. She’s so talented — particularly with performance. She has such a great sensibility of the tone I’m trying to catch, but also of the emotion, and then balancing that humor and emotion and not losing the character. All that has become effortless between us.
I shoot in a way that there aren’t a lot of editorial options in how to put a scene together, so it really comes down to performance choices. So most of the time is spent sculpting all that with the music and pacing and finding the film’s rhythm and so on, and we spent months and months just tightening it all. (You can read about how Riegel edited I, Tonya here.)
Tatiana, what was the editing process like as it was all remote? And what technology did you use to work remotely?
Tatiana Riegel: The editing process with Craig is a true collaboration. We build off each other’s ideas, and it becomes greater than the sum of the parts. It is an editor’s dream to work with directors that understand, appreciate and enjoy the editing process.
Craig’s films always have a very specific tone: beautiful emotion side by side with outstanding humor. I fortunately got that right away on Lars and the Real Girl, and now, after six films, we have an invaluable shorthand that comes with time and, of course, similar sensibilities. I am so fortunate.
Working remotely was better than I thought it could be. We were at an ideal stage for it to happen. We delivered the director’s cut the day we went home. Disney, our post supervisor and my crew were amazing at getting us back up and running in about a week. I was working locally from home, meaning I had all my own media. My assistants and the VFX crew worked remotely with HP RGS (remote graphics software) from their homes. It required a bit of time each day to pass media and bins so we would all be up to date but it worked well. Craig and I used Evercast to work together. Loved it!
What were the biggest editing challenges for you?
Riegel: The biggest challenges to editing this film were tone and pace. It’s full, fast and fun. We didn’t get to screen the film for audiences, which I think is so important. In the past, we would always do it often, but with the pandemic, that was obviously not possible.
(L-R): Director Craig Gillespie and cinematographer Nicolas Karakatsanis
Craig, did you find it hard having to deal with all the VFX remotely?
No, I found it very easy to work that way. All the technology now is so good, and you can just sketch designs on the laptop and send them right away. So I’d be back and forth with Max, and it’s actually very economical and effective. The one big thing I did in person in post was work with composer Nicholas Britell. Every week for four months, we’d get together and work on the music. He insisted on working that way, and he was right.
The film has a great look. Can you talk about the DI and working with your go-to Company 3 colorist Tom Poole?
The DP and I wanted to shoot this on film, but it wasn’t possible for many reasons, so we did tests on 35 and 65 film stock and sent them to Tom and told him, “Make the digital look as close to it as possible.” And he did such an amazing job that we couldn’t even tell the difference when we compared them all. I’m very happy with the way it looks.
Finally, what was the appeal of this story for you? It seems like the perfect fit for your sensibility.
It was. It all began when I got a call from Sean Bailey, head of production at Disney. I’ve really loved working with him on other films, and he said, “What do you think about Emma Stone playing Cruella in 1970s punk rock London?” That combination was a trifecta for me, and I jumped at it. I love Emma, and in the spirit of what we did in I, Tonya, Sean wanted all this great music like The Clash, Blondie and The Rolling Stones, so it was very exciting to me. Tonally, the script wasn’t quite what I wanted, but we worked on it, and Tony McNamara, who co-wrote The Favourite, did a pass and got it into just the right place.
Industry insider Iain Blair has been interviewing the biggest directors in Hollywood and around the world for years. He is a regular contributor to Variety and has written for such outlets as Reuters, The Chicago Tribune, The Los Angeles Times and the Boston Globe.
