HLA's Simon Ratigan On The Army... And Greek Yogurt

HLA's Simon Ratigan On How To Deal With The Army...
And Greek Yogurt

Due to the frenetic, multifaceted nature of moving-image advertising, commercial directors have to have the ability to turn their hand to numerous projects almost simultaneously. From cat food to car fuel, fuzzy mops to fizzy pops, the average helmer flits between jobs so rapidly it's remarkable that the quality (and sanity) sustains.




One director who caught our eye recently with two wildly different films is HLA's Simon Ratigan. Having been on the roster for 10 years, during which he's put together films as diverse as Sony's 'Foam City', Mastercard's 'Arrivals' and the DOH Anti-smoking 'Mutations', it's unsurprising that he's more than adept at switching between filmmaking genres and styles. His latest two spots – 'Nineteen Twenty Thirteen' for Total Greek Yogurt and 'Boots' for The Army – showcase just that, one a period-styled piece conjuring the look and feel of a lost 35mm vintage print, the other a exhilarating experiment that puts the viewer at the feet of the average soldier.

We took the opportunity to catch up with Simon to quiz him on the way he approaches each project, why post and edit can have a big effect on the final piece and how the business has changed during his career.

You've been in the commercial filmmaking sphere for a good few years now. Do you think it takes a particular type of director to get the best out of the work?

The best director for a job is someone who gets the idea, recognizes the pitfalls and knows what's needed to make it work. This understanding isn't always immediate, but it is instinctive and directors can have good instincts for a host of diverse projects. Sure there are directors who seem to specialize in certain areas, but in commercials this is often through pigeonholing rather than choice. That said I think most directors start out simply doing what they love most and although styles and subject matter change over time, a tone of voice remains, a personal aesthetic that shapes and flows through everything they do. So irrespective of whether they've shot anything similar before, get the match between aesthetic and script right and you've found the best director.

When you work on such diverse projects as 'Boots' and 'Nineteen Twenty Thirteen', do you find it difficult to move between them? Do you ever find your focus waning?

The Army and the Total job were so very different that it was easy to separate them and the situation was helped by having shot one before reccing the other, so there was no significant crossover. However, when you are involved with more than one script, which have similar deadlines, you've got to stay on the ball. I've had to location recce multiple jobs in the past that all required house interiors and it certainly got a little confusing at times. But it's more of a problem for the rest of production, who have to follow me around trying to guess what I'm thinking as my mind jumps between projects and scenes.
 

Those two examples go some way to show the different visual styles your work uses. How do you go about changing the look of your films? How much is on the DOP / location / equipment?

I don't really go about changing the look of my films, rather I try to identify the execution that feels most appropriate to the idea. These two projects were conceptually poles apart and that's what drove the cinematography in such different directions. One was a story with a clear narrative that needed to look old and hand painted. The other had to be current, intense and show what army life is like for real. Then, of course everything comes in to play such as choice of DOP, equipment, format and locations. The Total spot had to be shot on 35mm film so we could replicate the vintage feel in post and the camera had to be static to mirror the way scenes were shot in the 1920's. The army film, on the other hand, was shot on a 5D so that we could shoot beautiful images, but with a camera that was small enough to hand hold and run about with. The end results couldn't be more different, but they were the result of a need and relevance rather than a stylistic whim.

How do you feel the commercial filmmaking scene has changed in your career?

It's hard to answer a question like this without sounding like a whinging director. So instead I'll give you the viewpoint of the ident maker and aspiring director that I was 10 years ago. I worked for a number of broadcasters and every two months we would fight over the bimonthly DVD from Shots, specifically to watch the opening showcase section. Full of great ideas brilliantly executed, it was a lesson in simplicity, conceptual rigour and filmmaking craft. And there weren't just a few of these spots, but dozens of them and it was an inspiration to us all. Now I find there is little worth looking at, despite there being an abundance of talented individuals throughout the industry. It's not a problem, I still love what I do and am lucky enough to work on some great projects, but I don't imagine the world of commercials is somewhere that today's young and aspiring directors look for inspiration and advertising in the future will be the worse for it.
 

With the Army 'Boots' spot, is this a technique you'd experimented with yourself? Did it cause any problems on the shoot? Do you have a DOP with a bad back?

The technique came about from a need to have the camera constantly by a soldier's ankle. This could have been done using a steadicam or dolly and track with the camera set low on the rig, but I felt that I'd seen these kinds of shots before and wanted the footage to feel more intimate, more connected. Most of all, I wanted to be able to follow the boots as they ran, marched, jumped or played a game of football. So I had to devise a new approach and came up with the idea of hanging a camera from the end of a pole. And with the lens at boot height the soldiers would be able to film themselves. It felt too simple at first, but I tested it at home and immediately knew it was going to work. In the end, everyone from the soldiers, the DOP, the camera crew and myself dressed in boots and army fatigues did some of the filming, and thankfully, because the rig was so lightweight, no one damaged to our backs.

As well as the visuals, the sound-design and grade play a huge part in the montage effect, obviously as well as the edit. Do you get involved in those aspects too?

Absolutely. You can never be certain how a film is going to work best until you start putting it together. With the army film I only ever wanted to use sync sound and no music. A track would have softened the impact of the film and killed any sense of realism, but it wasn't until the client saw the final cut did I get the green light for a sync only mix. Bare of any music and with so many shots it was a long process getting it just right. In the end, we put the original sync sound with most of the shots, but augmented some, especially the gunfire, which when recorded live sounded like the soldiers were shooting toy pistols.

Likewise the grade was kept very natural and simple. I wasn't looking to glorify army life in any way, just capture it as it really is. The main issue was trying to reduce the high contrast characteristics of the 5D camera we were using. It made the world too sharp and colourful, so we used low-contrast filters and a soft grade to eradicate the problem.
 

Your Total 'Nineteen Twenty Thirteen' spot plays with audience expectations, the gag being that the film's look belies its actual era. How did you achieve the effect? What were your source materials?

Everyone on the project agreed from the start that we were not going to be able to replicate a 1920's vintage film look without first shooting all our source material on film. Great locations, wardrobe and art direction helped create a timeless feel, but it was the inherent characteristics of the film and the processing of the rushes that really delivered the look we wanted. We had to use contemporary film stock, so to degrade and age the rushes, we made prints from the negative, scanned and graded them, then made more prints from these graded scans. The resulting colour passes where then carefully combined to give us the look and level of detail we wanted. Colour was then stripped out and re-introduced from the various prints by hand using a digital brush. This took hours to accomplish, but gave the final film the texture and colour mottling that makes or so unique.

Do you enjoy location shoots like this? Are they ever more trouble than it's worth?

I love shooting on location, especially when they are as fascinating as an army base or as beautiful and unspoilt as the Greek Peloponnese. I prefer locations to sets and studios because the final film always looks and feels more real and from a filmmaking perspective it forces you to work with the parameters of the location. Sometimes these are a benefit, other times there create problems that effect framing, a camera move or the lighting set up. But dealing with these problems means shooting scenes in a way you wouldn't normally do, and that adds to the originality to the visuals and helps keep things fresh.

What's up next for you?

I'm treating on a couple of projects, finishing a spot I've made for HLA and then, and most important of all, taking a holiday while it's still 30 degrees. Directing is great, but you've got to make time for heatwaves.

Posted on 24th July 2013