Experts go with what they know. And they’ll often insist something needs to take a long time. But when you don’t have tons of resources, you need to ask if there’s a simpler, judo way to get the impact you desire. Sometimes there’s a better way than the “best” way.
I thought of this while watching “The Fighter” over the weekend. There’s a making of extra on the DVD where Mark Wahlberg, who starred in and produced the film, talks about how all the fight scenes were filmed with an actual HBO fight crew. He mentions that going this route allowed them to shoot these scenes in a fraction of the time it usually takes.
Every filmmaker that we talked to about directing this movie was like you can’t shoot the fights in 20 days, you need 35 days. And I said, “Well, we’re going to shoot the whole movie in 33 days and we’re going to shoot all the fights in three days.” And they said, “How are you going to do that? It’s never going to work.” And I said, “Because we’re going to film them like actual fights.”
So we literally did every fight from the actual beginning, coming out of the dressing room into the arena, into the ring, first bell, introductions, to the last bell, and everything. And we just did it over and over and over again.
And what I kept telling everybody is that HBO does it in one take and they don’t know what’s going to happen and they never miss a thing. We have the luxury of showing them what we’re going to do in the morning before we shoot it and doing it over and over and over again. So why do you need 20 days? For what? To jerk each other off? To touch up your makeup? To go in the trailer and take a nap?
We’re not talking about putting the camera in there and saying, “OK, we’re going to do a stunt punch here.” No, we’re going in there and beat the shit out of each other and we’re going to make it real.
Judging by the film’s success at The Oscars and the box office, the plan worked. And it’s a great example of reframing the problem and asking the right questions.
All these filmmakers insisted on a month+ to film the scenes because conventional wisdom says that’s the “right” way to do it. But sometimes conventional wisdom is more convention, less wisdom. And that’s when it pays off to take a questioning attitude and challenge assumptions.
Would taking the extra time with these scenes really add significant value? Sure, there’d be more slow motion, spit-flying, macro closeups. But would those shots really have made it a better film?
It ties in with another great question to ask: What problem are you solving? The goal was to make the fights seem real. Not to make them look good. To seem real. Focusing on that changes the requirements.
And that leads to another good question you should always come back to: Is there an easier way? The HBO fight crew is made up of experts at filming fights. They don’t need to be taught how to make it look real. They’re used to capturing a fight in one take — and that’s without knowing what will happen beforehand. Shooting this way is a piece of cake for them.
And maybe the most important question: What’s the opportunity cost? The whole film had a shooting calendar of 33 days. Filming it the HBO way means the movie gets made. A longer, pricier approach might have doomed the film and prevented it from ever being shot in the first place.
Most of us aren’t filming fight scenes. But the way Wahlberg and his team challenged assumptions and questioned traditional “best practices” is something that can be applied to all kinds of arenas, not just boxing ones.
Below: (Spoiler Alert! Don’t watch if you don’t want to know the outcome of a fight in the film.) This video compares Micky Ward vs. Shea Neary in “The Fighter” with the real fight.
Jackie
on 04 Apr 11@37signals
So is the lesson of this post, don’t believe in your employees?
JD
on 04 Apr 11One way to look at it is they actually did use “best practices” by going with an HBO crew. Just saying.
Anonymous Coward
on 04 Apr 11@JD
How’s the move to Chicago coming along?
Tim Jahn
on 04 Apr 11First off, that was such a great movie. Bale was fantastic.
Second, I really want to watch the behind the scenes on that DVD now. I love that stuff anyway, but this intrigues me, because it’s not typical of how a filmmaker would do this (as explained above). Something as complicated as the fights in this movie would be carefully choreographed and filmed meticulously over many weeks.
But for them to simply have HBO film them as real fight like they’re used to doing (choreographed of course), that’s just awesome.
Spencer Fry
on 04 Apr 11That’s an amazing story. Love hearing this come from the making of a Hollywood film. Maybe there’s hope yet!
ML
on 04 Apr 11So is the lesson of this post, don’t believe in your employees?
Um, no. The point of the post is to challenge assumptions and ask questions to see if there’s a quicker/more efficient way to get things done instead of just immediately buying into the conventional approach that might be the longest/most expensive way to solve a problem.
One way to look at it is they actually did use “best practices” by going with an HBO crew.
Well, there’s making-a-movie best practices and then there’s filming-a-fight-in-one-take best practices. Here they (wisely) went with the latter instead of the former.
JD
on 04 Apr 11AC – Luckily I didn’t have to make the move. I already live in Chicago.
Jackie
on 04 Apr 11@ML
You’re actually missing the point of this post yourself.
It was not the use of an HBO crew that allowed them to drop the filming from 20+ days to just 3 days.
What allow the quicker production was that Wahlberg was willing to take can actual (real) punch to the face.
When you stage an ACTUAL fight, of course you can film in it far fewer days.
Wahlberg talked about this in great length on an NPR inteview.
Jackie
on 04 Apr 11All,
Linked here is the lengthy discussion between NPR and Wahlberg and the director about him taking real punches and how they actually filmed that scene.
Start at 32 minutes in.
http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=132679137&m=132679143
ML
on 04 Apr 11Jackie, clearly Wahlberg’s boxing training helped too. And using the HBO crew also helped. I don’t think it’s an either-or situation.
Jackie
on 04 Apr 11All,
Linked here is the lengthy discussion between NPR and Wahlberg and the director about him taking real punches and how they actually filmed that scene.
Start at 32 minutes in.
http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=132679137&m=132679143
JD
on 04 Apr 11Not related, but Markie Mark also said he could knock out Manny Pacquiao. I’d like to see that. :P
Marianna Chapman
on 04 Apr 11Even as a girl, I love this post. I’m afraid this is exactly what happens even when really innovative people sit around with one another for too long – we start thinking the same and using the same ideas instead of creating new ones or borrowing better ones from related industries. Thanks for sharing – and for the comments that link to even more good stuff.
Jackie
on 04 Apr 11@JD
If you called Wahlberg “Markie Mark”, you’ll soon find out how fast you’ll be knocked out as well.
Richard
on 04 Apr 11@Matt – And you actually BELIEVE what they said on the extras DVD is true? How naive you are… It’s part of the entertainment value of the upsell. Most of those “behind-the-scenes” DVDs are about as real as the movie itself.
Aaron
on 04 Apr 11Marky Mark talking on NPR about the intellectual integrity of HBO.
Jeff D
on 05 Apr 11Interesting read. I will keep this in mind when planning my next web app.
Tim
on 05 Apr 11Great article by Aza RAskin on Paul MacCready, creator of the Gossamer Condo. A case study in how an intractable problem - creating a human-powered airplane - was solved by reframing the problem.
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1663488/wanna-solve-impossible-problems-find-ways-to-fail-quicker
Jonathan Manor
on 06 Apr 11Interesting. Sometimes conventional thinking is too safe, sometimes it’s favored to keep from injury. However, everything should be challenged when asking the right questions.
Sid
on 08 Apr 11Isn’t the right way always a safe bet? However, by following conventional wisdom, we wouldn’t be having an advanced internet space and all the current opportunities.
Justin
on 08 Apr 11I agree that The Fighter’s boxing scenes were amazing, and it’s astounding that they only took a week to film.
But a side affect of using a real HBO crew to film the scenes is that they looked like an HBO crew filmed them. It’s a different look than from, say, Raging Bull, which took the “standard” six weeks to film the matches.
The option’s there if a filmmaker wants it, but it’s not a panacea.
cgeye
on 08 Apr 11Is everyone overlooking the basic message—Wahlberg decided to forego the traditional safety built into stunt fighting to take actual punches?
Well, sure, some things had to be faked, but cutting costs by cutting safety measures is a now traditional hallmark of American business. He’s just lucky no one suffered acute or chronic damage, nor a hefty loss of completion bond insurance coverage by not going by the book.
Saheli
on 08 Apr 11Glad cgeye made the real point. This interview is probably as much about Wahlberg promoting his machismo image as a no-nonsense bad-ass who doesn’t waste time or resources on safety. That’s the unspoken but ringing undernote for so much of American discussions about business, safety, regulation and productivity. It’s the chief tool our society keeps using to bully itself into making stupid choices. Maybe Wahlberg can film a budget production of The Jungle next.
Kevin Inouye
on 10 Apr 11This works fine for what they were doing, but wouldn’t have been possible with any actual fight scene (as opposed to a sparring style sports event)... and Wallberg should know that by now.
My more full thoughts here: http://fightdesigner.wordpress.com/2011/04/10/the-fighter-or-the-boxer/
This discussion is closed.