![]() ![]() You can’t do that.” We built it, and it moved, and it looked fabulous, and it still looks fabulous 25 years later. I want it to move.” They’re like, “No, that’s insane. You bet I did! And you should have seen the looks I got from the construction manager in England when they looked at the plans for the drawings and I said, “I want to build it.” They’re like, “Really?” And I said, “Not just that. Did you build that actual thing - at that size? The Third Containment, I believe it was called. The core? The gravity drive? The, uh, giant rotating thing? So, something like - I don’t even know what to call it. I ended up with a movie that even now, because there isn’t a huge amount of CG in it, I think still looks terrific. Rather than having Laurence Fishburne in front of a blue screen, why don’t you build the set upside down, dangle him from a wire and spin him round and round, and spin the camera around while you’re doing it? It’s a lot more difficult, but boy, does it look good. He’d worked on 2001, Blade Runner, and all these amazing movies that, when you looked back at them, you went, “Wow, they still look amazing.” I said to Richard, “How did you do that?” And he said, “Well, just do everything as real as you can possibly do it.” That was his approach. I will say, one of the things that has helped it hold up over time is the advice I got from Richard Yuricich, who was my visual-effects supervisor on the movie. But I think maybe that hurt us theatrically the first time out. Did they really go to Hell? Was it just a dimension? And that classic haunted-house question: Is the Event Horizon really haunted or is it the people who are going there that are bringing their own haunting? Are they the ones haunting the house or is the house haunting them? As a cinemagoer, I like being able to discuss the movie afterward. Is Joely Richardson insane? Is Sam Neill really there? It’s unsettling. ![]() A lot of audiences - they like certainty. It doesn’t tie everything up in a nice, neat bow at the end. First, the movie has a very downer ending. I think some of the things that hurt us as a theatrical release back then have been our saving grace in terms of building a cult audience over time. It has been nice to see it find its audience over the years. When Event Horizon first came out, it didn’t do great business and was savaged by critics. On the occasion of the movie’s release in a special 4K edition from Paramount, I talked to Anderson about the endurance of his now-classic film. (“Where we’re going, we won’t need eyes to see.”) Anderson understood how to shock audiences - maybe too well, since members of his studio were notoriously outraged when they first saw the film - but Event Horizon carries a fascinating cautionary tale about our inability to let go of the past, a tale enhanced by a cast that brings real depth to what might, on paper, have looked like fairly disposable genre work. This was due partly to the indelible quality of its imagery: its brief but deliriously grotesque glimpses of Hell, the medieval-torture-device-like design of its titular spaceship, not to mention a final act that featured a mad Sam Neill running around naked and on fire after gouging out his own eyes. (Those of us who were fans of the picture back then can tell you how lonely an experience that was.) But over the years, Anderson’s film grew in reputation. Starring Sam Neill, Laurence Fishburne, and a spaceship that had just returned from a journey through Hell, Event Horizon came out in August 1997 and bombed with critics and audiences alike. Anderson released one of the gnarliest, most unforgettable science-fiction horror films ever made, but it took most people a few years to realize it. 25 years later, he knows it looks terrific. Anderson made a gruesome sci-fi film with mostly practical effects.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |