Storyline
Storyline
home - Review - Characters
- Director Interview
-
Miscellanea
Interview with David Wheeler
[ including some supplemental
remarks by PoV producer Rob Landeros (RL) and myself (AL) ]
Warning: This interview
contains spoilers!
See also: Alternative
interview with David Wheeler and my Vancouver
Resident Interview
What are your opening
remarks?
DW -
Before I begin to answer your questions directly, I’ll give you a brief
history on how and why PoV was made:
Rob and I opened up Digital
Circus in Vancouver to produce a trivia/crossword based “game show” called
Let’s
Do Diddley which was inspired by a game Rob designed back in the 80’s
called Lexicross. It has no live video but there is a great
deal of extensive sound work which creates a feel of playing a game with
a “live” host and his computer/robot assistant, something like the experience
of playing You Don’t Know Jack. I contracted with an audio
production company named SuperSonic to do the sound recording and editing
on Diddley and they suggested that if I were to make another DVD based
interactive movie like Tender Loving Care (TLC), they would like
to be involved. They offered to provide all of the post production
for the project including video editing, sound editing, music, sound mixing
and DVD authoring for a percentage of the profits. We were having
some programming difficulties with Diddley which created some time
to do something else.
I was living and working
in a loft in Railtown which looked across at an empty loft on the other
side of the street which brought to mind the situation in a script of mine
called The Watcher. I suggested to Rob that we should look
at the possibilities of making it an interactive movie. The Watcher
had been very close to production several times (one time I was just a
few days away from shooting with Sharon Stone in the lead when the financing
fell apart) and I had always wanted to make it into a film. I put
together a budget which would allow us to make a professional quality film
for the least amount of money, a budget that would ensure that everyone
was paid at least a semblance of industry standard (except for Rob and
I, we spent 14 months on the project without pay). Our distributor,
DVD International, advanced us $85,000 and we shot the movie on digital
betacam in 12 days, compared to TLC which was shot on film in 31 days for
about $700,000. We needed to change the title to Point of View
in order to avoid confusion with the Keanu Reeves film The Watcher
which came out during our post production phase.
About half way through post,
SuperSonic kind of imploded and went out of business which put us in very
deep trouble. Their parent company, Stratford Internet Technologies
was seriously staggering and they tried to support the completion of the
project but they crashed and burned and we had to finish the project ourselves
which just about bankrupted us. We were several months late delivering
and by the time it was released our distributor was also staggering financially
and they have put zero dollars into marketing (they were expecting us to
share the marketing costs but we were unable to do that because we were
financially exhausted by having to finish the product ourselves, so they
decided to put no further money into it). They are refusing to pay
us royalties though they have sold thousands of copies.
You made PoV on $85,000?
Why do some online articles about it say that the price tag was in the
vicinity of $1 million? What could account for this discrepancy?
Also, are your figures in Canadian or US dollars?
RL -
That million dollar figure for the budget is so out of line. Perhaps
some people believe in pumping up the facts, but David and I generally
tell it like it is. The $85,000 figure was the shooting budget.
We figure the total to be about $250,000 with post production costs.
David knows those figures exactly. I didn't deal with the budget
at all this time round. In my mind the $250,000 would be in US dollars.
I can say that our publisher
certainly didn't add any more to that budget to bring it anywhere near
a million. In fact, DVD International has spent very little in way
of advertising and promotion. They are not even offering royalty
statements, so we don't know the exact sales figures. Needless to
say, we are in dispute with them.
One general rule of business
that you can always count on - if things are going well and a product is
a big success and money is rolling in, then there are no disputes and everybody
is friends. If things are not going so well, all parties ends up
arguing, bickering and pointing fingers.
[In contrast] we figure roughly
$1.5 million for TLC. It was a much longer shoot, we had a well-paid
actor, an orchestral musical score and it was shot on 35 millimeter film.
It was also authored for CD-ROM and DVD-ROM and localized for Germany and
the Netherlands.
*
A). Direction:
What methods did you use
to audition actresses for the lead role?
DW -
I was new in Vancouver and not at all familiar with the talent pool so
I requested the help of Bette Chadwick, a casting director I had worked
with several years ago on a television show called Hollywood Babylon.
She put out a “breakdown” which goes to all the talent agencies and we
received a lot of demo reels from actors. Those actors without extensive
demo reels read some scenes (“sides”) from the script which their agents
put on tape and sent to me. My final choice was one of the latter
and her audition tape was really good. I met with her to discuss
the part and decided that she was the one. We auditioned several
choices for each of the other roles by having those people read with my
final choice and built our cast that way.
I strongly suspect some
hallway scenes (especially near the elevator/stairs) were filmed on the
floor just below the roof level of Railtown Studios. But I also suspect
you mainly used an apartment one or two floors lower than that. Please
indicate the exact apartment you used for Jane.
DW -
[unanswered]
AL - One
or more of four apartments at the northwest corner of Railtown Studios.
The hallway of level 4 was certainly used in the chase scenes of chapters
5 and 12. The hallway just outside apartment #5 on the first floor
was used in chapter 6. It is unclear if the first floor is on the
same floor as the building's entry room (i.e. it is not clear if Railtown
Studios has what is known as a "ground floor").
I managed to identify,
visit, and photograph all but three of the locations of exterior shots
in PoV. Where exactly were the following scenes filmed?
* Jane photocopies her
pictures of Frank at night in chapter 3?
DW - The
photocopy scene was at Kinko’s on Georgia Street in the Downtown area.
* Frank speaks to the
audience while driving his car in his chapter 4 Encounter?
DW - Frank’s
encounters were shot in and around Gastown and the area just east of there.
We got in the car with a camera between scenes at the newspaper coin box
and just drove around the neighborhood doing several takes of a couple
of scenes.
* Peter makes his first
telephone call to Jane in chapter 5?
DW - We
had a phone booth on the grip truck and plunked it down on a corner near
the location for P’s apartment which was by the intersection of Jervis
and Barclay in the West End of Vancouver, not far from Stanley Park.
Where were the following
interior only scenes filmed?
* the police station?
DW - Sean
Penn was filming The Pledge at the same time and we used part of
the set they had built as a police station for our police station.
It was in a place called the Koret Building near the Alibi Room.
* Jane and Mary's workplace?
DW - Jane
and Mary’s workplace was in the offices of SuperSonic’s parent company,
Stratford Internet Technologies (which no longer exists) at 1168 Hamilton
Street in Yaletown.
* Jane's struggle with
the New York photographer?
DW - The
New York photographer’s studio was actually Frank’s apartment redressed.
Please give some indication
as to where these scenes were filmed:
* Mary's home?
* Peter's home?
* Mr. Barnes' home?
DW - All
three scenes were shot in the apartment of our line producer, Kelsey Haynal,
a three story, Spanish style building on Jervis St. near Barclay St.
I mentioned elsewhere
on this site that your obvious admiration of Vancouver was the #1 factor
for my trip there. Did you in any way intend to increase tourism
to your city via PoV? If not, why have those wide angled shots and
have the story firmly set in Vancouver (in your other PoV Internet interview
[see Links page], it seems as if you were prepared to set it in any one
of several other cities)?
DW - [unanswered]
RL - I
thought it [Anthony Larme's fascination with PoV] was a unique excuse to
visit Vancouver.
How did you go about choosing
the musicians to provide the vocal and instrumental soundtrack for the
movie? What factors made you select Payton Rule and jefreejon?
DW -
I was introduced to Payton and Jefreejon by our production designers Andrew
Bell and Stacey Malysh. The script called for Frank to play in a
small band. I loved their music and they are really nice people.
We contracted with them to write and perform the two songs in which they
appear in the film. The rest of the score was supposed to be provided
by SuperSonic’s Brian McConkey (who wrote the title sequence piece) but
when they fell apart I contracted Payton and Jefreejon to do the entire
score. They were great to work with. It was the first time
they had done anything like this but it was like working with seasoned
professionals. They are very creative, talented, flexible and hard
working. And they wrote some killer tunes.
AL - Plus
their work is contemporary and passionate - two qualities that complement
PoV's characters and plot perfectly.
In Tender Loving Care,
some movie scenes contain nudity. In PoV, no movie scene contains
nudity. Why did you avoid the use of nudity in this case? On
a similar matter, what influence did censorship (including possible moral
outrage and marketing difficulties) considerations have on your directing
and/or writing in PoV?
DW - The
script was more erotic than the final product. This was one of the
main topics I discussed in my first meeting with my final choice and she
was very enthusiastic about that aspect of the script because it explored
the sexual nature of the character with the same kind of approach as the
other issues the character deals with in the story. There was some
nudity involved and she expressed that she was very comfortable with it.
But as we got closer to shooting she began to panic about it. She
saw Tender Loving Care and I think she freaked out about the scene
where the Kathryn character, played by Beth Tegarden, presses up against
the window. (I’ve taken quite a bit of flak for that scene.
Beth was pretty freaked out herself about doing it but I really admire
her for coming through, even though I seem to have offended some people
with it). I think the Jane Bole actress understood that Kathryn in
TLC was a sexual predator and Jane was nothing like that, but she nevertheless
got into an emotional state over the nudity aspect of the sexuality and
threatened to bail right before shooting. I was sympathetic towards
her and understood how she felt but I was not at all happy that she didn’t
express her concerns earlier. I considered replacing her but I knew
she was otherwise perfect for the role so Rob and I talked it over and
we decided to stay with her. And her performance is great.
I’m happy with the result,
but I do miss the sexuality that was in the script. One film distributor
who had read the script and expressed interest in a theatrical release
was disappointed that the unique approach to female sexuality in the script
had been left out. Some people felt the sexuality in TLC was too
confrontational and others complain that the sexuality in PoV is too repressed.
Maybe one day I’ll get it right.
RL - The
nudity issue was a great annoyance. It's not so much the fact of
having nudity and it's being integral and highly relevant to the story,
but that the actor, who had already agreed to it then single handedly forced
a significant change to our creation. It was not a collaborative
decision amongst artists. We were held hostage at the last second.
The PoV endings look like
they were filmed in very chilly conditions for PoV's male and female leads.
How did they cope with the cold? Also on the subject of the endings,
a criticism I often read is that they are too similar. Why not have
more variety in the endings?
DW - It
was quite cold, being a night shoot in March in Vancouver. The lead
actors weren’t wearing much but it was difficult for everyone. Paul
Jarrett who plays P had to lie on the cold cement for a close-up and, even
though he was wearing an overcoat, it was difficult for him to stop shivering
- not an appropriate behavior for a dead person.
I also think the endings
are too similar. In TLC, the endings were vastly different but the
differences in the alternate scenes in the body of the film were so subtle
that many viewers didn’t notice them. We tried to correct that with
PoV and focused on very different alternate scenes leading to Jane ending
up with three completely different characters, but, in hindsight, we should
have gone further. Remember that this is an evolving form of storytelling
and we’re just about the only ones in the world that are doing it.
I’ve written the script for the next one and I think I’ve corrected these
problems.
AL - The
lead actress wears a white T-shirt under her larger blue shirt during her
rooftop struggle with Edwards.
You're making another
interactive movie? Can you please reveal something about it - even
if just to reveal that it's a thriller like PoV or TLC? If all financing
goes according to plan, when do you intend to release it?
RL - Any
future projects will be planned on a case by case basis. If the story
had a larger cast and needed special location shooting, I should think
that a budget somewhere in the middle would be nice. The use of name
actors would have a major impact on the overall budget. Any
new interactive movie we are working on isn't close to being the pipeline
at this point.
Had you already secured
the rights to use "Jane and Frank's" apartments before you started writing
the screenplay? Also on the locations topic, was it hard to film
in the Alibi Room? Do you have any more comments on the locations?
DW - Jane’s
apartment was actually the loft I was living in and Frank’s apartment was
the empty loft in the new building across the street. I got permission
from my fellow tenants in Railtown and I rented the place across the street
for a month. We also used Frank’s apartment for the photographer’s
studio and equipment storage and a place to have our meals while we were
shooting.
The Alibi Room is a restaurant
and bar which is open 7 days a week so we had to be in there in off hours.
We shot for two days between 4 and 10 AM and got out in time for them to
prepare for lunch. It was a lot of work to do in a short time.
We did the Nimble Hippo music scenes in the cramped bar downstairs while
it was dark both days and the meeting at the Alibi upstairs one morning
and the romantic dinner the next.
Most of the locations were
within several blocks of my apartment. I completely adapted the script
to my current living situation at that time. The Sunrise was my local
market, the Alibi was my local bar, the street corners and alleyways inspired
me as I explored the neighborhood walking my dog.
Please share some details
of any funny or otherwise remarkable incidents that occurred during the
filming of PoV.
DW - Several
people in the building complained that someone in the building cross the
street had been shooting them (while they were doing intimate things, I
guess) with a video camera for a couple of days. The building manager
explained that it was just us making a movie and the camera wasn’t pointed
at them at all and everyone was assuaged. As it turned out, we were
in a different location on those days, and some neighbor actually
was taping their private activities.
I couldn’t afford a proper
audition studio so we taped auditions at my loft and my dog was just a
few months old then. He’s an Australian Shepherd named Yankee and
he seemed to get particularly excited by auditions. I would be busy
operating the camera and the poor actors had to struggle through their
scenes with a very enthusiastic puppy molesting them. Actually it
was a good test for the actors trying to remember their lines and staying
focused on their scenes while keeping the dog at bay. I would use
the technique in the future but Yankee is now, to the great relief of Vancouver’s
acting community, living with my mother on an island far from the city,
which makes them both very happy.
Brief filming questions:
* Between what dates in
2000 did you film PoV?
DW - I
can’t remember the exact dates but we shot for 12 days, with one day off
in between, in March.
AL - A
pink notice near the intercom system at the front door of Railtown Studios
in PoV shows that at least some filming took place in the second half of
that month.
* How many digital cameras
did you use to film PoV?
DW - Our
primary camera was a Sony Widescreen Digital Betacam. We used another
digital camera for behind the scenes footage and only used it as a second
camera during the Nimble Hippo scenes.
* What are some scenes
that required traditional movie artificial lighting equipment rather than
just daylight, moonlight, streetlight, or standard light bulbs?
DW - [unanswered]
AL - Jane
and Carol in bed together and maybe more?
*****
B). Storyline:
What is your background
in dealing with the world of fashion modelling? In what ways are
these experiences reflected in PoV, both in the plot and in the character
of Jane?
DW - I
used to direct and photograph television commercials and I specialized
in fashion. I worked with a lot of models and the character of Jane
was partially inspired by several of them.
AL - For
further information, please consult David Wheeler's profile on Aftermath
Media's Website at www.aftermathmedia.com/
In the backstory you developed
for Jane:
* Why does she work as
a cleaning lady?
DW - Jane
works because, like most artists, she needs to earn money to support her
art and she’s chosen to clean offices after hours because of the relative
isolation.
RL - I
think it is also interesting that her job in the original script had her
working amongst the stacks of the Vancouver public library. Her reasons
for working there would be the same, but I think we both liked the original
library setting much more. But we could not get clearance to shoot
at a real library. Or something like that. Again, not being
there for pre-production, a lot of my information is second hand.
AL - Plus
she needs regular friendly human contact.
* Where did she learn
to be an artist and why?
DW - She
went to art college because she showed a lot of talent and got involved
with modelling as a lark through some friends in the fashion design department.
AL - But
later, she used art as psychological therapy to come to terms with her
experiences?
* What is her age?
DW - She's
26.
AL - Evidence
in PoV's lead actress's interviews suggest that she was at least 23 years
old at the time PoV was filmed.
What is the name of the
artistic technique Jane uses to create the portraits of herself and Frank
that she hangs on her bedroom wall?
DW -
[unanswered]
AL - Lithography
(or a close variation)?
One of the PoV questions
asks whether or not the viewer thinks Jane is a victim. To what extent,
if any, do you consider Jane to be a victim?
DW - Jane
is more troubled by her own actions than the actions taken against her.
PoV is not a story about a woman who was raped, it’s a story about a woman
who killed someone who was attacking her and the resulting guilt she feels
and how that has affected her life. She’s suffering from something
akin to soldier’s remorse and the question the story poses is: if she’s
faced with the same circumstances again, what will she decide to do?
RL - I
think her confession to Frank (that the prosecution's allegations regarding
her use of her sex to manipulate men and her enjoyment of it are true),
is key to understanding Jane's sense of guilt.
AL - She
was a victim of attempted rape, but does her best to recover on her own.
Jane is brave and determined and is thus making a gradual recovery.
The label "victim" to describe the entirety of her life as we see it in
PoV is totally inappropriate.
As far as you are aware,
does any Canadian or US newspaper actually carry regular romantic personal
correspondence between two people as seen in PoV? If so, which paper(s)?
RL -
The script was written years ago. Way before Internet access became
ubiquitous and before caller ID and answering machines were common.
This sort of dates it. That's why one of the Exit Poll questions
asks if Jane shouldn't have caller ID and an answering machine to screen
her calls.
Not necessarily taking
into account the newspaper article that sometimes appears at the very end
of the movie, if you were to film a sequel or at least a few more scenes
after the PoV ending where Jane and Frank hug on the rooftop of Railtown
Studios, how would Jane's life/personality turn out? What impact
would her PoV experiences have had on her?
DW - The
ending is purposefully not all wrapped up in a tidy bundle. There
are still a lot of questions regarding what might happen to Jane, but I
intended to leave the story with a feeling of hope that things would get
better for her.
AL - Agreed!
Hopefully, a bright future is ahead of her with Frank.
What are some examples
of scenes you originally wrote in any version of the PoV screenplay that
were never filmed or at least never placed on the final version of the
DVD?
DW - The
entire ending sequence, all versions, were shot on the last day (night)
of shooting and I had to cut a lot of stuff because we were running out
of time. There was no possibility of shooting another day so I really
had no choice but to eliminate scenes which I really would have liked to
include.
What other endings would
you have liked to shoot, had you had the time and money?
RL - Regarding
the endings, we have since thought of other good alternatives, or have
had them suggested by fans. I wish I could remember them!
AL - Jane
gets arrested, hurt, or killed; Frank turns out to be the villain; one
of the existing villains is subdued rather than killed. Also, perhaps
Jane is a lying, psychopathic killer?
In the "making of", you
remark that Mr. Barnes was only a small role that expanded as the production
progressed. What did you intend his role to be originally?
Perhaps there were
just two suggested villains
at the end of the story at that time?
RL - The
character of Barnes was originally just to show that Jane had an effect
of some kind on just about every man that she encountered. I think
Barnes had the impulse to be Jane's protector, but as an unconscious excuse
to be in a position to instigate a more intimate relationship. In
the original script, all the male characters posed a possible threat to
Jane...at least in her mind. We tried to bring out that sense of
possible threat in the interactive.
What does Peter do for
a living?
RL -
We don't know. During exploration we come across some fantasy artwork
by Barnes and P. Barnes' work is very crude with Jane's face cut
out and taped to nude models. P was doing similar fantasy work but
his was much more sophisticated and indicates that he is very intelligent
and adept at new technology. His fantasy composites were much more
realistic [ AL - Having
privately seen these computer files for myself, I fully agree with this
statement! ]. So much so that we decided we should not include them
as some people might mistake them for being actual nude photos of the lead
actress, even though I went out of my way to visually convey the fact that
they were in fact fake Photoshop composites. It is interesting
that P and Barnes were doing fantasy art with Jane similar to the way Jane
was doing with Frank.
When Peter is being questioned
by Edwards in chapter 6 and is asked why he chose Mary's personal column
ad to reply to, he says "I guess her ad just seemed ??". I can't
understand the last two words in that sentence. Please reveal what
they are. It may also be a two syllable single word.
DW -
[unanswered]
AL - Possibilities:
"to suit me"? "too easy"? "too needy"? "to speak to me"?
How many days, weeks,
or months elapse between the opening scene in PoV and the night chase at
the end of chapter 6? What about chapters 7 - 12 ... do they really
take place over just 24 hours?
DW -
[unanswered]
AL - 1-6
= about one week. 7-12 = less than 24 hours?
You mention the "Nimble
Hippo" in both TLC (as a pizza place) and in PoV. Is this just an
amusing name you invented, or is there some reality to the Nimble Hippo?
DW -
[unanswered]
AL - It's
just a fictitious amusing name?
*****
C). General PoV
questions:
In each group of questions
between chapters, about how many have an actual impact upon future scenes
(including Explore and Encounter objects/scenes)? Also, why have
a series of questions at the end of chapter 11 which can't impact upon
the ending? Finally on this topic matter, what exactly is meant by
the "phantom demon"?
DW - We
consider the questions to be very much a part of the entertainment.
Our technology is such that any number of questions can impact the story.
The phantom demon is an example of Rob’s penchant for the supernatural
in movies. We had some of that sort of thing in TLC but I cut it
out and he was disappointed. In this case, it’s based on the murky
drawing of the photographer that Jane was using as the message sender before
she met P and it represents the demons from her past.
RL - My
scheme was to have several between the earlier chapters, then have the
number taper down until there were only 2 or 3 near the end and none before
the final chapter. For some reason, it didn't quite turn out that
way. I was unfortunately not in close communication with the programmer
and due to geographical distance, I didn't see stuff till it was already
implemented. It could be that David and the programmer, Rob Barrett,
thought more questions were better. But I should have paid more attention
to that and must take most of the responsibility for any shortcomings in
that area.
AL - Perhaps
20 percent of all questions have an impact upon future scenes? The
questions in chapter 11 largely belong in earlier chapters and none of
them have any clear influence upon the endings. Thus, the chapter
11 questions should have been almost, if not entirely, non-existent.
What was the contribution
of Rob Landeros to PoV and how is this reflected in what the viewer sees
and reads on screen?
DW - Rob
is the interactive designer and though we work closely on the development
of the project, deciding what alternate scenes and paths to add, he is
ultimately responsible for the interactivity. He decides on and oversees
the production of the supplemental elements, the menu designs and all art
direction elements, even the packaging - and he wrote all of the
questions. My job is to write the script and direct the movie, oversee
post production and I’m more involved with the music. But we are
each the other’s sounding board and we more or less collaborate on almost
all aspects of any project.
Where are you currently
working? Is Digital Circus finished? Does only Aftermath Media
remain?
DW - Digital
Circus is about to release Let’s Do Diddley, the gameshow/crossword/trivia
game I originally came to Vancouver to produce. It’s finally finished
after 2 and ½ years. We are also working on a CD-ROM version
of PoV. Currently, we are working on a major CD-ROM game with a Vancouver
company called Lunny Communications (http://www.lunny.com/)
which will be closer to our earlier
7th Guest and 11th Hour
games in nature. I’m ready to do the next interactive movie but I
need to find a new distributor because of the bad business DVD International
has given us.
What are some of the demographics
and entertainment preferences of PoV buyers? What demographic did
you target PoV toward and what were your motivations for doing so?
DW - We
don’t target anyone, we just make the films we want to see.
Do you have any intention
of releasing PoV and/or TLC as a linear movie?
RL - We
have not really tried to push PoV as a linear release. We already
did that with TLC, and although we had a sales rep and some rights were
negotiated for certain territories, not much came of it. Most people
say that TLC should have been picked up by at least some cable stations
because its quality is superior to so many of the movies that are aired.
But we found that marketing a film has little to do with the quality of
the product. It has to do mostly with expensive name actors and a
studio to
promote it.
What about the recent
(April 2002) public screening?
RL - The
screening was for the Celluloid Film Club in Vancouver. It is a very
informal setting for film buffs, filmmakers, actors, etc. Liquor
was served. There were about 250 people in attendance. The
interactive DVD was projected on the screen and an MC helped poll the audience's
choices.
It took about 3 1/2 hours
to finish. I was surprised at how many people stuck it out.
It was a quite boisterous evening and the crowd was really involved.
Since PoV was not designed for this purpose, it was quite an interesting
experiment.
Why was Federico's Supper
Club chosen as the location of the PoV wrap party?
DW -
[unanswered]
AL - Live
entertainment, great food at reasonable prices, friendly staff used to
capably dealing with large parties, not too far from the PoV filming locations?
*****
Thank-you very much, David
Wheeler and Rob Landeros, for your informative answers!
