Director Steve Quale
The New Guy
Just as Perry has been with the franchise from Day 1, Final Destination 5 is the first movie since the second one that brings a new director on board. That director is Steve Quale, who has worked closely with James Cameron over the last 20 years. Besides directing the 3D documentary Aliens of the Deep and a TV movie, Quale was also the second unit director on Cameron’s Titanic and on Avatar. Having been on the set of the fourth film, we were impressed by the way they were filming in 3D, but Quale clearly has upped the ante using technology that allows them to actually view what they’re filming in 3D on HD monitors while they’re filming, rather than having to send footage to a trailer to process and playback later, which should make a big difference.
According to Perry, that experience with 3D played an important factor in them hiring Quale as a director, but it wasn’t the only reason: “Obviously, Steven has an enormous amount of experience with the 3D cameras having literally been the guy 20 years ago, he was there through all the R&D and the application so he’s learned as the systems were being refined. It’s almost old hat to him the way he utilizes the technology. That’s one of the big benefits. Steve was also a DP who shot feature films himself he’s done a lot of second unit. He brings a cameraman’s eye so this has a particularly lush look to it. I think the production values and the cinematography are better than all the other movies because he’s bringing to it a specificity and a requirement that it look great, and it really does. David Sandefur our production designer who came up with all this crazy stuff has done a really good job of maximizing the value of the resources that we have to make the movie look far bigger than it has any right to look⦠which is EPIC. Another thing Steve brings is he’s worked with someone⦠Jimâ¦Cameron? Yeah, that’s the guy. So the attention to detail and a very rigorous work ethic and all of these things conspired to make this process a little bit of a revelation because you just don’t imagine that you’re going to get this kind of a movie with a Final Destination movie. Having him come to direct it, we’ve got a real movie that’s really big and it’s going to surprise the hell out of people.”
As is almost always the case, the director tends to be busy making a movie when we visit–as it should be–but we did manage to grab Quale to answer a few questions in between takes:
Q: Had you seen all those other movies before you got the gig directing this one?
Steve Quale: I had seen them when they came out and then I revisited them again. I actually did a marathon screening of all four “Final Destination” movies one after another, and it’s interesting because you see a lot of the subtleties and differences to it. I like the original just because it was the original and it set up the franchise. I like the humor of #2 , and I thought #3 had some interesting elements with some of the characters, but I think overall, this film is more of a cross between some of the humor in 2, but more of the character-driven stuff that was in the original one where you cared about the characters and what their plight was and what they’re doing. The thing that’s amazing is just how dedicated the fans are to this franchise in particular. It’s amazing. I just have the utmost respect for the fans and the amount of energy that they spend trying to figure out the subtleties of all these and “Why does this make sense? What does 180 mean? Why is this character and this rule and Tony Todd’s character?” It’s just really interesting to see what they like about it, and hopefully we’re giving them as much of that as I think, as a fan, would want.
Q: Do you feel there’s a freedom working as a new director in a previously existing franchise or is that a constraint?
Quale: It’s interesting because I look at it as a fan. I watched all the movies and just me personally said, “What do I like and don’t like about these movies and what would I want to see?” In the end of the day, you can make a movie for all these different people, but if you make it as something you would want to see, and your sensibilities tend to jive or are in sync with the rest of the target audience, then that’s the best world. I looked at it and said, “Well, what would I like to see? I’d like to see an amazing situation where you’re on a bridge and oh my God, it’s starting to crumble. What do you do? What’s your survival instinct? How do you get off? What if there’s no way to get off?” and then you start thinking from there and then you start thinking, “Well how can you make that visually dynamic?” and then you start thinking as a director and a cameraman, “Where do I put the cameras to make all that work?” and it just kind of goes on in an organic fashion and then you build the movie out of it.
Q: How would you say this is different from those other movies?
Quale: We really focused a lot of energy on the characters, because to me, I’m saying that this is not just about death, it’s not just about horror. This is following an interesting group of people, what they’re doing, what their life’s ambition is, what their struggles are, and how they relate and deal with this force that is thrust upon them that is correcting–for whatever reason–people are dying and why is that happening? And what is the fate of that? And follow that story, in addition to following the visceral dynamic elements of seeing them getting killed, and the horror, “Oh My God, why did that happen?”
Q: When you start with such a big set piece and you have to go to a character scene with people talking, how do you keep that interesting?
Quale: It’s all working with the actors and finding their voice in the characters, because we have a great cast, and they’ve brought so much new blood into the whole series that it’s fantastic, and you work with them, you do the rehearsals and you figure out what is the driving motivation for each character in each scene and then based on that, it works organically even when you block it. You might have an idea in your own mind how to do a scene, but then the actors come in and they may bring a whole different level to it, saying, “Well, wait a minute, why am I doing this like this and what is the motivation of my character?” You just have to think in their head and feel, “What is this story trying to tell and what is the character feeling?” and if you do that, you can sort of bring some life into it and make it feel real.
Q: How are you approaching the kills in terms of doing gore. Are you doing that practically or using CG?
Quale: I’m a fan of believable FX. It doesn’t matter how it’s done but if you can do a prosthetic make-up effect and make it look real, that’s way better than trying to do a computer graphic thing that sticks in someone eyeball and looks totally fake. I’m a firm believer in getting as much practical stuff as possible with the exception that we can’t practically destroy a bridge, so you have to rely on them, but we have the cars that are sliding so as much of this is practical and real so that when you intercut into some wide shots⦠actually, I even flew and did an aerial day on the Lionsgate Bridge to get both the plate elements from a real bridge, so we’re not having this CGI stuff, because I can’t crappy computer-generated stuff. There’s no place for in movies that I make as far as I’m concerned.
We’ll look at how they’re approaching those effects a bit later, but first we’ll talk to the cast of the new movie in the next part of our report.
Source: Edward Douglas
