FILM / Production Notes: Mike Boudry of the Computer Film Company on how he pushed Tim Robbins over the edge

Shelia Johnston
Monday 22 August 1994 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

THE MAIN sequences we worked on were the two scenes in which Charles Durning and Tim Robbins jump from the top of a high skyscraper. One thing that's a bit different about these special effects is that they're very long. Often, film effects last just a few seconds, so that it's all over before you get a good chance to look at them.

The Coen Brothers are visually very specific. It's quite amazing how accurately the storyboards they drew are there in the final film. They're unusual in that respect - Bernardo Bertolucci, whom we worked with on Little Buddha, will tell you what he wants and then expect you to go away and do something magical.

We had to produce the falling sequences in a way that accords with the Coens' vision. That's not necessarily the same as being physically right. For instance, you don't necessarily want physically correct timing, you want dramatically correct timing. And you don't want people to fall in an untidy way. In archive footage of the Hindenburg disaster, where people actually fell out of an airship, you see them trying to run in the sky. Whereas what you imagine happening, and what happens in Hudsucker, is that people put their arms out and sort of fly. That's the dramatically strong and acceptable way of showing a fall, otherwise it gets grotesque and horrible.

Many shots are a mix of effects. When you see Tim Robbins by a window, there are three elements. The window itself is real. The top of the building around it and the clock is a model. And the snow is computer-generated.

When Paul Newman looks through the window, note the pane of glass just under his chest. It isn't actually there; it was added in later as a special effect. If the glass was there while they were filming, it would have caught a reflection of the camera crew.

And the first fall, when Waring Hudsucker (Durning) jumps out of the window, starts low, at street level, and pans up. You start with a real building, but only up to about the first floor. After that, you see a model, until you come to the man smashing out through the glass, which is filmed against blue screen. I love these long, fluid complex shots. With digital technology, you can put together very complicated continuous sequences involving different effects in the same shot, and Hudsucker is probably the prime example of it.

'The Hudsucker Proxy' opens on 2 Sept

(Photograph omitted)

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in