INTERVIEW WITH CLAIRE MATHON
It's like Christmas.
It's everywhere. In the eyes, it's like...
Forty candles is fine.
Hey, this is cinema.
A TALE
The film is a recollection,
since she's narrating the story.
She recounts it.
And we're quite suddenly in another...
It's actually the combination.
These are things we discussed at length,
as to the relationship
between the times and places,
the story, the era and the time gap...
of this tale...
Physically, geographically,
it is sort of a tale.
"I arrive by boat, I cross the fields.
There's a forest and a chateau."
There are very few people,
except for these women around the fire...
The surroundings
are reminiscent of a fairy tale,
as far as the surroundings
and geography, anyway.
I think Céline would like
this fairy tale analogy.
SKIN BECOMES LIGHT
There's also a connection to beauty.
Just wanting these women
to be very beautiful.
It harks back to skin tones
from another era.
It also makes me think of painting.
Among the paintings we saw,
many were from the 18th century,
but we were also inspired by other works.
We attended a Corot exhibition
during preproduction.
There's something about Corot's portraits
that convey...
I thought there was
something beautiful about them.
In these portraits,
we don't notice the light so much,
or the direction or color of the light.
What predominates are the skin tones,
the color of fabrics,
the color of backgrounds.
As if there was
relatively little light direction.
It creates something that's...
I don't know. There's something
I find utterly beautiful,
and that creates, not quite a desire
on my part to mimic paintings, but...
to achieve something photogenic,
or "cinegenic"...
I found these portraits beautiful
because suddenly the skin itself
literally becomes light and color.
As opposed to it being the light
that illuminates a face.
MESMERIZED BY FACES
When we did our "interior-day" shots,
we had to imagine what time of day
the scene took place,
the weather outside,
whether it's fair or overcast.
A luminous setting or a color mood,
in order to portray a sequence
in its proper light setting.
Every time, I kept telling myself,
"Their performance is so accurate."
We might do this or that, but in the end,
we were just mesmerized by these faces,
and asking ourselves
what was this luminous state
that they seemed to be in.
I don't know. This sort of balance
between the emotion inherent to the scene,
and what the actresses conveyed.
Also at work in this process
are the states of...
In the film,
they're called "transient states."
Anyway, the faces change
with the weather, the time of day,
more firelight or less...
along with the quality of light
as it transforms.
But I often felt that it was most
accurate not to be aware...
The things I find most interesting,
and we'd often talk about it...
We did likewise for night scenes,
which we'll discuss later.
But it was really about
creating something abstract.
It fit the film well, as we'd often talk
about purity and a clear design,
whether for the sets or for the lighting.
To end up in a place where we see
only faces in front of backdrops.
All these notions relate to painting,
in a way.
This is also true in painting.
It all comes down to a skin tone,
a piece of fabric, and a backdrop.
2018th CENTURY
We had discussions about the era,
and decided to do the film in 35 mm.
It'll be a way of capturing the era,
capturing the beauty.
Something to that effect.
We thought, "Why not?"
It's a good idea to film in 35 mm.
I was rather pleased.
We talked it over with the producer.
She said, "If you want to do tests
for 35 mm and digital, go ahead."
So we did different tests,
35 mm with a Leica Summilux,
and a RED Monstro
with Leica Thalia for digital.
These first tests were done
almost four months ahead of the shooting.
We then went on location in Brittany,
on the Quiberon peninsula.
We filmed a few landscapes.
I had my assistant with me,
who happens to have a beautiful face,
somewhat timeless.
We filmed her also, without makeup.
A young woman's face,
and a few landscapes,
at different times of day,
and in various weather conditions,
since obviously, in Brittany,
weather changes on an hourly basis...
In the end, I thought both versions
looked beautiful,
and it was rather satisfying
to have two viable options,
two types of image that I liked,
both consistent with the film's intent,
in regard to the beauty of the faces,
and the beauty of landscapes.
And the choice we made —
By chance, we had just started discussing
the movie, and were talking about the era.
Céline said the movie was a recollection,
and that the 35 mm format
would sort of enhance
this idea of recollection.
There was also this beautiful idea
that the period shouldn't be set
in one specific location.
It was better to invent...
She said something
we'd often refer to, which was,
"It's better to invent
our own 2018th century."
So there was a desire for an image
with a more... contemporary look.
The era as seen from today's perspective.
There were words —
I loved the close-ups of the face,
both in 35 mm and with the Monstro.
She said, "There's a connection,
an incarnation, a presence."
Maybe it wasn't stronger,
but it was closer to the way
she wanted to depict these women,
this era, and this story,
in digital, using the Monstro,
rather than in 35 mm format.
So...
So we did the film
with a Monstro, Leica Thalia setup.
SUNLIGHT AS HARMONY
We started by doing the film's exteriors,
and then did the interiors.
We had a few sequences
that linked together the ensemble...
The weather turned out much better
than we'd expected, but...
in the end, I think it worked quite well.
I'm very happy that the film sort of
pulled itself towards nice weather.
Although the script called for more...
more turbulent weather,
which conveyed a somewhat gloomier
version of the story.
The opening scene in the boat
was originally set in bad weather.
"The sea was rough. The boat rocked a lot.
The crate falls overboard."
That's the way it was
originally written out.
Plus, it was going to make things easier
to shoot in cloudy weather.
Because they're complicated scenes
that require a whole day of filming,
with lots of shooting angles.
It's a lot easier to do in constant light.
Then, all of a sudden...
All in all,
I think it's a beautiful scene.
Anyway, it motivated me.
In the end, it ties in with a word
we used a lot on a project such as this.
We talked a lot about beauty.
We always talk about it in filmmaking,
but for a period piece
and for this one in particular,
I felt a real craving for...
for beauty.
As it turns out,
the sun was my best ally in that quest.
Filming the exteriors first gave me —
It's so varied and so rich,
as far as the colors,
reflections, blending.
The weather is ever changing,
at once overcast and sunny, the ocean.
All of a sudden,
there's a richness, a mixture.
It's quite something...
Nature, and its ever changing aspect,
with the wind constantly blowing.
There was something elemental about it.
Afterwards, it felt great to bring
the elements into the interior set,
with only spotlights, in a fixed setting
where we'd come to shoot every morning.
We all brought back some sand from
Quiberon to the Seine-et-Marne studio,
and we'd use it as a daily reminder
that the wind was blowing outside.
The exterior was only seen
through backdrops.
So most of the spotlights
were set up outside
on both sides of the chateau.
On one side, they were on a platform,
and on the other, on cranes.
In the end, we had a whole array,
but there's never enough.
Anyhow, it was a huge installation
that allowed a myriad of possibilities,
such as creating sunlight,
overcast skies, reflections.
It gave us a lot to work with
for the interiors.
Then it was cut, diffused,
reworked again on the interior.
The set was huge, so we could add
many layers of lighting.
What's great is that we could concentrate
entirely on getting a natural quality
and the simplest expression.
It allowed limitless choices
and gave us total control
over lighting conditions.
We were able to fine tune things.
A large share of it was done...
by chief lighting technician
Ernesto Giolitti.
Some of the lighting
was done by using SkyPanels.
Part of it was managed through
DMX technology, with an iPad.
It was a very convenient way to work.
We could go from one lighting effect
to another within the same day.
Doing a morning shoot with a given effect,
an afternoon shoot with another.
It even allowed us to keep track
of various lighting patterns we'd used.
Overall, we did a lot of blending.
From the outset, we felt that mixing
various light sources was best.
So, we used LED for its convenience,
and its brightness,
and many SkyPanels
from small ones to large ones.
We believed in mixing many light sources,
so there are some HMIs in there,
along with HMIs mixed with tungsten.
Both for the qualities of light
and the color relationships.
Trying to render what seemed most...
I don't know how to say it,
but to my taste,
the most natural, the most varied,
with many little strokes, little bursts...
little patches of sidelight.
I like to apply many layers.
So light ends up
passing through many layers,
before it bathes these faces.
FIRE
Early on, I thought we shouldn't be
subservient to fire and flames.
Foremost, for the direction of light,
because candles and fires are often low,
and that would create
lighting issues on the faces.
So, I was going to change
the direction anyway.
A flame is harsh,
fire is harsh as a light source.
I really wanted to retain
the softness on the faces.
So I'd keep my distance from the candles.
There's also a lot of flicker
in candle flame and fire.
It rapidly became overly present.
These are the kind of things
we tried to mask,
or attenuate as much we could,
this flickering movement.
And once we started...
Then precisely to avoid...
having it look too much
like a period piece,
we keyed down the candles and the fire,
to better concentrate
on the actresses themselves.
The other thing had to do
with color temperature.
Because all this lighting
can sometimes create very warm colors.
I kept the warmth, so it'd be realistic,
but I've always tried to keep it
to a minimum
in order to retain nuance in the colors,
the skin tones, costumes, fabric,
and filmed paintings.
So when you strike a balance
between no movement,
no light sources in the frame,
not too much warmth...
All of a sudden,
you end up losing touch with reality.
There's a risk we stop believing
that they're in front of a fire
or lit by candles.
But anyway, I felt that...
it was another means
we could use to not get...
Just like with the set, in a way.
It's not about directing,
but rather focusing on the characters,
their feeling and their gaze.
LIGHTING THE FLAMES
What worried me was
that the candles, the flames,
wouldn't be pretty, lively, and colored.
That they'd be too bright, too "digital."
But that's what...
It impelled us to do what the film
called for, which was to light,
to light substantially,
to light a lot, in fact.
The Leica Thalia are not sensitive lenses.
So during the tests, I asked myself
if I'd be able to shoot at night,
with candles at an f-2.8 aperture.
The Monstro not being highly sensitive...
I also did tests with other lenses —
I thought I might dispense
with very large sensors,
and reduce the size of the sensor,
so I could use lenses
of wider aperture at night.
And in the end,
I realized that it impelled us to light.
Interestingly enough, during the tests,
we had an exact sensitivity equivalency,
meaning that between 35 mm and digital,
there wasn't...
Typically, you'd imagine
that sensitivity would differ —
It's true of certain cameras,
such as the Varicam,
sensitivity makes digital
very different from film.
The rules of the game are not the same.
But with the Monstro-Thalia
and 35 mm wide aperture,
we ended up with the same sensitivity,
which was relatively low.
The equivalent of 500 DPI 1.3 in digital.
Interestingly, it impelled us —
the 35 mm would've done it too,
it impelled us to light.
I'm happy to have lit quite a lot,
especially the night scenes,
so the candles and fires come out nice.
We had candles that we'd sometimes
place in the reflector of a blonde light,
so they could be directed.
On one part,
it's lit with directed candles.
And we also used tungsten lights,
but with tiny lightbulbs,
assembled in garlands
that we called rope lights.
We made lamps, frames,
various light sources out of rope light.
Made of tungsten which
we liked because of its warmth.
It was somewhat warm...
So to take some warmth away
from these two small light sources,
there was another source we used
that was indispensable, which was LED.
Foremost,
for its ease of use as ribbon lights.
And also for the scenes using a light boom
when they walk with candles,
it's so much easier to use LEDs on a boom,
because it weighs very little.
We also made lamps out of LED ribbons.
Recently, they started manufacturing
LED 2000 which are very warm and pretty.
The LED 2000 lights
by SoftLite look very nice.
So we had lamps that were LED 2000
there was rope light,
and finally, what we liked most —
The advantage of LED
is that it's not as warm,
so it enabled us
to reduce excessive warmth
and recover a bit of hue.
But if we used only LED,
we found it cold and somewhat lifeless.
So it was a mix of real candlelight,
the warmth of tungsten,
the user-friendliness
and neutrality of LED.
So in most candlelit scenes,
we blended these three light sources.
