“X” and “Pearl” are the first two entries in the amazing horror trilogy, which ends with the recently launched “MaXXXine,” which are quite different. “X” was impressed by Gonzo, the gritty filmmaker of the 1970s. “Pearl” seems to prefer that it was probably shot by the Freed unit and parodies the three Technicolor lessons inseparable from outdated Hollywood blockbusters. However, each film shares director Ti West’s love of filmmaking and the personal appeal of films, for better or worse.
The Pearl is a 1919 prequel starring Mia Gott, one of many two characters she played in X – but the film’s genre is adjusted to match its protagonist’s origins story. It’s more related to the old-fashioned type of capture, where the composition, framing and lighting of the location can tell us all about Pearl finding herself on her parents’ farm without moving the digital camera an inch. However, when it hits, the audience feels it.
West joins the Filmmaker Toolkit podcast to discuss the conscious style and formal decisions he made to make “Pearl” such a compelling dive into the heroine’s pursuit of subjectivity, the opposite type of what this psychological horror story needs The emotional payoff, along with plenty of smudged pink paint.
Listen to the full episode or continue to learn excerpts from our interview.
You’ll be able to listen to the entire conversation above, or subscribe to Toolkit Podcasts via Apple Podcasts, Pocket Casts, Spotify or Overcast.
Some transcripts are as follows:
West on film’s outdated Hollywood aesthetic
I’ve been thinking about, well, what movie am I imagining after I imagine Pearl’s story? I used to be fascinated by that golden age of Hollywood and the conventions of showbiz glitz and glamour and the best way to make a formal film. This aesthetic appeals to me, except for the fact that it’s just a story, and yet that genre inspires it.
I believe this distinction is an important part of it [the appeal]. I trust myself because I know the story is going to be a psychological one, but it’s also pretty circular in some cases and has these healthy images or baby-like types and Disney-like people flawless imagery that feels like an option to bring something that could be very retro back into fashion again because it could be really modern because I definitely rarely see an aesthetic that is used to such a narrative . This looks inspiring. It seems like a good motivation to get up in the morning and stay up late to do it. This just adds another layer to the movie.
In any other case, we would have thought of doing it with this black and white German expressionism. The main motivation for this is that it’s probably cheaper because we don’t need to paint anything in color – every part is gray. We might be halfway there. We shouldn’t do a lot of polishing on every part. Taking action is cheap. At the time I was looking for something that might make the movie cheaper because it would make the movie more interesting because it looked like the movie was actually on sale, so it might be silly not to. However, A24 liked the movie in the best possible way, so it got a credit score.
Wester reaches the film’s colorful look
The three-stripes color curriculum is a very unique factor. You can’t actually recreate it without using it indirectly – and we haven’t used it yet. So you might just get so closed. There is only so much you can do when it comes to color grading. You’ll be able to turn up the saturation and do something like that. It will help, but it will never get you there. The stuff that gets you there is like something on a digital camera. So for the clothing, the manufacturing design and every part, we actually took a lot of effort to notice the color palette and notice how all the colors matched together and how the lighting was differentiated and the way we did it.We just have to be very careful about what we’ve been shooting [Technicolor], doesn’t matter. Then you can decorate it with suitable colors. However, mostly what we do. I mean, we already have color correction built in, a three-stripe factor type that simulates separation, but it only does so much. I mean, when you show up on the dailies and the final model, the final model is more vivid, but not more vivid.
Made only in 1918 it is so unique.it’s weird [time period] Make a movie. So each prop feels a little unusual. Kind of rooted in the 1970s like it jumped out of “X” three weeks ago. It’s a real lucid dream factor, shifting gears like this. However, I believe that once you actually interact with your period, it goes a long way.You already know, they don’t sit at the entrance of the computer system all the time [and the film looked] like that. As soon as you put the individual in terms of clothing and hairstyles and things like that, it starts to become that world. But yeah, it’s a very long, esoteric way to solve your favorite problem, “Ah, that’s not appropriate at all.” You already know that?so you always try to get it just a little bit [more perfect] – For example, is that powder enough?
Like the barn, when you show up at our workplace, you notice all the color swatches of the barn on the wall, probably 10 of the same pink swatches, but like we’ve been sitting at the door it’s like Consider, like, “Hmm. I don’t know.” Like the scene with the corporate card in American Psycho. you already know, [we] Always been fascinated by these very specific problems, but it’s different because you actually need to be good at it for it to really be a solid approach. We do put a lot of movie stills on the walls of the workplace, for that approach when people walk into the workplace – we did the same factor for the “X” – you can see a huge wall of photos , and get the type of world you were once in. That would be anything from “The Wizard of Oz” to “Crimson Sneakers.”
West on how movies tell Pearl’s story
X has a more avant-garde strategy overall, and the photography is sleeker and more efficient, trying to get you through the story through digital camera transfers and digital camera presentations. Are you sure about the problem. And “Pearl” prefers to be included in the lock, we’ll let you know. We’re going to add one more thing to the story throughout where the digital cameras are and the actors are moving around the area – it’s very much like Jenna Ortega on the steps compared to the “X” Operation on. You don’t know the room. She activates the sunlight, the digital camera pans to the bulb, and another thing is displayed. It’s just another way to tell a story with a digital camera.In that more traditional sense, it’s more like a digital camera standing in one place, but the mother of pearls is chopping wood and putting the wood on top [block] it blocked Pearl, and then when she tapped it with her accent, [the chop] Expose pearls.
Doing these extra formal questions is simply delightful. I mean, as someone who theoretically likes to make movies, it’s fun to do that because it’s basically not going to work in every movie, but it suits this kind of storytelling. [The movie] Very targeted to tell the story inside the body and the way the characters are shifted and positioned inside the body. So, you realize, it’s a relatively easy way to shoot. They sit at a table and the best way for them to sit on the table tells you who is who in this story, maybe there’s a faux tree-like backdrop outside the window, the palette gives you the vibe this home is in Inside, the music sets the tone for you, and like the blues, it’s what it’s like to be in this home. In any film, especially this one, you always try to tell as much of the story as possible within the frame.
Filmmaker Toolkit podcasts are available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Overcast and Stitcher.
Registration: Keep up to date with the latest film and television news! Join our email publication here.
The Filmmaker’s Toolkit: An Interview with Ti West