The film at hand, the History of Sound, was in development in limbo for some time before finally production shooting was underway.

And during that period, you worked with the director, Oliver, on the miniseries Mary and George?

Yeah.

What's the timeline of the two of you's collaboration?

Like, were you in talks for History of Sand prior to that, or did.

Did that come about during Mary and George?

Yeah, I came quite late to Mary and George.

I had heard about the projects kind of in tandem, in a way.

My agent had told me about the project, and they said, oh, there's also a feature film that is very interesting as well.

And I'm from the Boston area.

And so I grew up kind of knowing a lot of the locations that History of Sound is based at.

And so I heard this sort of rumor from my agent that, oh, there's this TV series, but also there's this movie that is kind of set in Maine and set in New England and those kind of areas.

And so both had really piqued my interest.

But I ended up collaborating with Oliver, and that was a.

You know, we were in 15th century England, you know, in that piece.

So it was very different than History of Sound in a lot of ways.

But Oliver and I joke that I did spend.

Spend 16 months kind of lighting without real incandescent lights, you know, lighting with candles and lighting with fireplaces and those kind of things.

And so it was an interesting 16 months, for sure.

But still, Marian, George was the first shot and then came History of Sound, right?

Yeah, yeah, we did Mary and George first, and I ended up being in London for like four months and then came back and had a few months where we were just talking, you know, about History of Sound and then started History of Sound maybe four or five months after that.

Yeah.

And even though, if I'm correct, the two of you on Mary and George were the lead director.

DP duo, episodical and feature filmmaking are widely different ventures.

Do you think the film would have looked different if you'd shot it first before building that?

I don't know, collaborative shorthand on the series?

Yeah, I don't actually think that.

I think they are very different things.

And Oliver's approach was different in either of them.

And so as much as I learned things from Mary and George that I brought to History of Sound, those things were more just the ways that he kind of likes to work.

And so I think the approach was definitely different.

And it had to be different.

And I was.

Part of me was sort of expecting, oh, well, we did this now this will translate to this.

And it was like, not at all.

You know, we're starting again.

You know, the only thing I know is his name, you know, but not really more than that.

There was definitely that impulse, I think, you know, the rubric of television now makes you shoot it a certain way because it was still in Oliver's mind, but it allowed for a sort of closer box.

You know, you have all these period costumes.

You have this timing you kind of can't explore in the same way.

Whereas with Paul and Josh, it was really important for Oliver to kind of explore every day and find something new and find something more in the moment.

And so I think there was more freedom to do that in the film setting.

And the script itself is adapted by Ben Shattuck from his own short story.

Yeah.

Did you get to read the short story, or could you read it prior to boarding the project or accompanying the script?

Yeah, I didn't actually.

It wasn't released until after we had finished filming.

I had read some of Ben's other short stories.

I have six walks.

And so I kind of read that to sort of just kind of get a tone, I guess.

I never thought to ask for the original short story, but at the point of reading the script, the script is so beautiful and had so many incredible elements to it.

And reading it, I felt like I really got a kind of a picture of the world.

So I didn't feel that I needed to necessarily go to the short story and find the kind of brief version of that, in a way.

And I'd guess you come across great scripts, good scripts, scripts that are okay or even not so good.

And having worked with authors like Paul Schrader and Oliver Hermanus, where, of course, we can say that there is an additional twist here as well, since Mr. Schrader is quite an accomplished writer as well.

Taxi Driver, Raging Bull.

While I believe we can say that Oliver is primarily a director, in your experience, what makes a screenplay properly filmable, shootable?

Hmm.

It's an interesting question.

I mean, the thing is that the form is not a set form.

You know, it's not like a novel.

Maybe you expect certain things, and maybe in a screenplay, you expect certain things too, as well.

But I've just found what's always really interesting about reading different screenplays is how they pique your interest in different ways and the way they kind of go about taking information and sharing it with you both.

With you as a reader, with you as the audience member, with you as a technician who's going to work on the project.

And I think that's what makes interesting projects is you read it and you either go, huh, what is this thing?

I want to know more.

Or you go, wow, this made me feel a certain way.

Or you go, hmm, I didn't feel anything.

Is that interesting?

You know, these are all interesting sort of ways to go about reading a script and engaging with it.

And I think because the medium is not set, it's not.

There are requirements to it.

You know, you often have certain ways of reading a script or certain ways of displaying a script.

But ultimately, I think what's so engaging for me and what I love is reading different types of scripts.

You know, I did two movies, I did two movies the year I did History of Sound.

I did History of Sound and I did this movie called Is God Is by a playwright, Alicia Harris, who also directed it.

And you couldn't think about two more different scripts.

They both headings and they both had endings.

But you're just talking about the form being changed and manipulated in such dramatically interesting ways.

Are you always looking for challenge or is it okay for you to go into something that somewhat feels familiar because you know that challenges might arise, whether it's familiar or a completely new adventure.

I mean, there are always going to be challenges.

You always learn something.

There's always something that you didn't expect that's there and sort of makes you alter your way of being in making that film.

I sort of love that expression kind of.

The film makes itself, in a sense.

The film discovers what it's going to be as you're shooting it, as the requirements, as you sort of get placed into the box of locations or time or whatever time of year or whatever it may be.

But yeah, I am always looking for a challenge.

I mean, I think that's interesting.

I think it's always interesting to challenge yourself, whether that be, oh, here's something at a bigger scale than you've worked at, or here's something at a smaller scale than you've worked at for a while.

I'm always looking for interesting script that kind of takes me back, sort of blows my hair back in a sense, or that makes me feel something because I think it's so hard to make movies.

It's such a huge labor intensive process.

And I want to be able to not know that my time is worth it because that doesn't seem.

That's not really what I'm after.

It's more to know that how you spend your days is how you spend your life, that you're sort of Fighting for something.

And in the history of sound, we essentially accompany the characters portrayed by Paul Maskell and Joshua Kanner through years that then turn into decades.

How did you go about separating.

Showcasing the passing of time when it came to visuals in a more of a general way?

Yeah, it's an interesting question.

You know, there were subtle things that we did from sort of a color grading standpoint and from sort of way that we filmed it standpoint.

But I would say that what Oliver is really amazing at is that he really builds his worlds from the ground up, and he uses production design and uses costume to really create that sort of change in time.

So I feel like that's much more felt from a production design and from costume design standpoint in this movie than anything else.

I think in a lot of ways, we kind of use one paintbrush, you know, one set of lenses, one set of things in order to kind of, like, tell the story.

Because Oliver is doing these sort of period pieces, it allows him to say, okay, well, there was a world at that time.

And now I'm going to use my aesthetic to say, this is the world that we're building.

This is the world that we're going to live in.

And it's a really powerful tool for a director even just to set a film back two or three years because it allows you to say, okay, well, this is my perspective on that time, not this is the time.

And I think that really allows to showcase how as time passes, things change.

But there are subtle ways that we used.

Our portraiture, used wide shots, color grading, in order to also emphasize that as.

Well, along with the emotions that run quite high in this one.

Music is not only a tool, it has space along with the emotions to be at the core.

But music is something we hear, but your job and responsibility is what we see and how that makes one feel.

Of course.

Yeah.

So I guess what I'd like to ask is, what was that like depicting something that can really be cut by the eye itself, as in the form of someone hearing the music or creating it?

Yeah.

I mean, I think that ultimately what is in the final edit is a camera that just sort of reacts to people singing and reacts to people or captures people singing, captures people playing.

And it's a very neutral camera in a lot of ways.

There are some beautiful montages within the scope of the film in which different songs are blended together and all that.

But that's not stuff that I really have access to.

The first time I actually saw the film with all the music was at the Premiere at Cannes.

So in a lot of ways, it's sort of what's in Oliver's head and how he.

He is interested in sort of blending it.

You know, there was a moment where we were talking a lot about the synesthesia and how synesthesia could sort of factor visually.

But, you know, ultimately, synesthesia is, you know, a neurological process that is exist, exists like a memory.

You know, it does not exist like something in your.

In your visual plane.

You hear a note, and it takes you back to a time, and it sort of exists within your brain.

It doesn't exist within your visual.

So that's a very difficult thing to necessarily visually capture or visually represent.

And ultimately, while we did a lot of experimentation and a lot of different sort of elements that we captured on set, ultimately, as Oliver went through it, it's, you know, in the final product, it doesn't exist.

So I think that in a lot of ways, kind of what you see is what we filmed.

And just being in those spaces with those incredible performers, you know, Paul and Josh and the incredible singers, that sort of rounded out the cast, that was sort of enough to kind of have something to respond to.

And as for the physical spaces, the film takes us with nature playing such a crucial role here and us having, hopefully, such a limited control over it.

I'm curious, do you have an established process when it comes to scouting and choosing exteriors?

Absolutely, yeah.

I mean, you know, having grown up in the Northeast, I have a lot of sort of, I don't know, weather knowledge.

Not really, but somewhat.

I mean, my father's, like, basically an amateur meteorologist is sort of hilarious.

All those years of him telling me about the weather have kind of paid off.

But, yeah, you know, you're constantly sort of checking apps and checking sun direction and thinking, oh, well, if we get this kind of weather, then we might get this kind of light.

And there are some rules that I definitely will advise my director by.

I was like, okay, well, it's a longer scene.

You know, I would suggest looking this way first or I would suggest looking this way first.

So I definitely have, like, at this point in my sort of nature photography career, have kind of figured out how.

Not figured out because the weather is so changeable.

But I have certain hints that I can kind of go towards to make things feel consistent and feel okay.

And ultimately, you also have to get lucky.

You know, I only have so many things at my disposal in order to kind of make it feel consistent.

And, you know, consistency, especially for long scenes, is the name of the game.

And in terms of interiors, to what extent could you solve lighting?

Naturally, primarily.

I mean, daytime scenes, though we can, of course, talk about nighttime as well, since, for example, the opening bar scene has such a gorgeously warm feel to it.

No, thank you.

I appreciate that.

Yeah, I mean, so I started in documentaries.

I started in sort of anthropological documentary work.

And so my background is always like, what is there naturally?

You know, I go and I sit in a space and I say, huh, this is interesting.

So, for example, the bar scene, what would be there?

Naturally, I talked to Deb Jensen, the wonderful production designer, and she said, well, at that time, you know, this would be the kind of place that would have a couple bulbs, a couple light bulbs, and they would use that plus candles to sort of.

And.

And a hearth, potentially, to light this place.

And so I said, okay, well, if we're in Boston, you know, at this time, and there's sort of this level of electricity, then I can start to motivate kind of soft, rappy sources that kind of.

You see.

Maybe you see a bulb, but the bulb is very dim.

And then I have probably a push from above it, you know, to sort of continue that and make that usable.

So it's really about kind of starting there, you know.

No, no interior in this is sort of lit with only sunlight or only daylight, I should say.

Everything is a continuation of what daylight should feel like.

But, you know, we might go.

We might be in.

In the Kentucky home, and we might have three scenes that day.

Every scene has to feel a different way.

And so I want to make sure that I have control to be kind of like, wherever.

The emotional tenor of that scene as well.

Because on one hand you have naturalistic lighting, and the other hand you have what is going on with the story.

And they kind of, for me, have to fit together.

And so it doesn't make sense necessarily if, you know, something very depressing is being talked about.

And yet, you know, you've got this bright, streaming, happy wind light coming through the window.

So I'm always trying to model and trying to do something that feels naturalistic, but that also makes sense for the tenure of the scene.

And I had the wonderful gaffer, Andrew Hubbard, who is sort of my partner in crime here.

And he's just really brilliant technician and brilliant artist.

And it was a real joy to be, like, to try to describe to him, okay, I'm thinking about this type of thing, and what about this kind of thing?

And then have him sort of execute it really, really beautifully.

I think, like, Lionel's first Morning at David's, after they sort of slept together for the first time, they met each other at the bar.

To me, that's a great example of how can we take what's naturally there.

We had all these windows on sort of two sides of the building.

But how can we then use different types of lights to create a mood?

And so we ended up getting one lift.

And on that lift, we placed one HMI and one tungsten unit sort of right next to each other, one over the other and aimed them in different ways so I could get this sort of nice subtle push from the hmi.

This very broad push.

And then this very, like, kind of spiky and golden thing coming from the tungsten unit.

And so when you see Lionel sitting in the chair, he's kind of getting hit by that, in a sense.

So I really think it's about melding that idea of what does nature give us and what can we do within our sort of budget resources and how should the story feel and how can we emphasize what that character is going through?

And other than interiors and exteriors, there is some way bigger movements as well as in overseas, shifting between different.

Not only emotional but geographical territories as well.

Absolutely.

From these American folk music scenes to Europe and back.

And you've described the.

The camera's movement and use as something more so reactive.

And how much of the surroundings, the backgrounds, you and team has had to rely on palette and texture.

Did these different worlds demand different camera languages from you?

Yeah, I mean, you know, in sort of Oliver's film worldview the camera can only move when people move.

And it's a very classical approach and it's a wonderful approach.

And so that sort of always led the discussion.

It had to.

And so that still, regardless if we were in Europe or back in the US that sort of was the through line.

There are moments that make sense for the camera to move when the character isn't moved.

For example, when Paul is floating in the fountain, we have a slight boom up on that, you know, but he's still in the frame.

It's not an exaggerated movement.

It sort of plays well for the emotions.

That's still within Oliver's sort of film worldview.

That being said, you know, it's really important for Oliver to feel the different textures of the different places we were.

You know, this is a film that travels a lot.

We're in Kentucky, we're in Boston.

We're in Maine.

We're in Italy.

We're in the Lake District, especially Italy.

He described wanting this sort of low Italian sun feel and.

Or just this sort of warmth.

And so we really started to push that both in the approach and in the grade as a result of sort of being in Italy.

And then, you know, England was very much what it was.

You know, you have just these beautiful landscapes and this sort of grayer sky and, you know, that just sort of gives you a certain look.

So, you know, to his credit, I think some films would have very much tried to say, okay, well, we're going to do all this in the US and we're just going to figure it out, you know.

But I think it really gives scope and it gives scale and it gives a totally different texture if you can go to a different place that is written in the story and go and film there.

Because I would have a really hard time creating that sort of low Italian sun without being in a sort of terracotta environment.

You know, it's bouncing.

The light is bouncing everywhere.

It's coming off of this beautiful golden brick and it's creating this light.

And not that that's not possible in the US but you're just at a different geographic location, different way that the sun is hitting the earth, and the result is beautiful Italy.

Well, Alexander, once again, thank you so much for your time and for this behind the scenes look at the history of sound and your craft itself.

Thank you.

Awesome.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate it.