What first interested you in a career in film - was there, for instance, a particular film you saw early in life that blew your socks off and made you think, "I want to do that"?
Well, yeah there was, but it had been building. When I was reasonably young, say 16-17, I joined the film society; you know, go see Tarkovsky's Stalker because you weren't going to see it anywhere else - dare I say it, this was almost pre-video. Anyway, so there was a real interest, especially in film and music (the punk thing, as well as Star Wars, came along when I was 13 and they both blew my mind).
Track forward a few years; I'm 21, taking a year off university to work on an archaeological dig in Thailand with my professor. And I'm down there, covered in dirt (seven metres down), we'd probably just cleared out all the baby cobras that fall into the excavation pit overnight (when I say we, I mean the local farmers who we had working on the dig) and I'm sweating, excavating a baby burial (which sure is something to do, very delicate, very sobering) and a film crew turn up. They were National Geographic I think. And they're up there with their "film cameras" and I thought, "Fuck, that's the life. They can check out all this interesting archaeological material, but they don't get dirty," and they were off to Angkor Wat the next day and then Egypt or something. I thought, "My god, that is what I should do."
That was the beginning, I went back to NZ, finished my degree and then set about making videos and trying to get into an art school where I could get my hands on film gear and make movies.

So art school represented your film training and education?
And I'd spent years getting Alice In Videoland to courier movies down to Dunedin (Fellini's, Buñuel's etc) - that was a primary and extensive film course. Then I did the fine arts degree at Ilam, which was, er, well, they had a lot of gear anyway. That was good, and I met Paul Swadel there (who became one of my best mates and produced my first short) and Francis Van Hout who turned out to be "Lenny Minute". In fact, I made [short] Lenny Minute at Ilam and got a "B" mark. Being a naturally humble soul, I took the lecturer to the University Council, saying the mark was unfair. I think I won and it was upgraded to a "A-" or something. Then I sent it away to Cannes Film Festival myself (you can do that with Cannes, you don't need to go through some big funding body), and it got into competition. That was an education; sums up many things about film.

What was your first screen-related gig and how did you score it?
Ilam decided to let me do my final year out in the industry. I went to Wellington. Then Lenny was selected for Cannes. Then, I can't remember the details, I somehow got an interview for a job on a magazine show out at Avalon - this was '93 or '94; I can't remember the name of the show. Anyway, it was about health and fitness and all the people were great and I started making these little sexy segments; you know, a guy who does ashatanga yoga, with "S and M" music running underneath; just playing, trying things. It was fun, and Sarah Stretton, the young producer there, was a real encourager of talent and a real advocate of me, she was great.

So, relatively briefly, how did you get from that first gig to doing this interview?
Well, all of it flows from Lenny Minute One, the short. Lenny was quite cutting edge for its time, certainly one of the first Kiwi computer-animated films. Dave Gibson saw it, and was experimenting with the idea of having Monty Python-like animations in a comedy series called Skitz, I came on board, formed a team and we started pumping out weird little animations and I accidentally ended up directing live action sketches too, which in essence is where I started really working with actors.
But I was very certain I wanted to make films, and had been working on a mid-sized budget sci-fi in my spare time. I did a year on Skitz, then left to concentrate on the features (at the time people on the show couldn't believe I was turning down money to develop scripts on the never-never) and The Irrefutable Truth About Demons came up because (a) I'd always loved B horror movies and (b) it was cheap and therefore relatively easy to get up, while the sci-fi Dave and I were working on was taking a long time to develop. So, Demons it was.
Then, after the success of Demons, the Film Commission offered me a modest sum to spend a year just writing and honing my craft. I wrote Poisoned Earth,an apocalyptic sci-fi (which I'm hoping to do next) and Perfect Creature.

So how have you managed to keep the wolf since then? Directing television commercials perhaps?
Well I wish, re: TVCs, but no one's ever asked me to do them. Basically I've supported myself by doing some sfx compositing, designing title sequences while writing my own scripts, and now writing for other filmmakers. The NZFC have been supportive of me too and see me, I think, as quite productive script-wise, not just for myself, but now for others; for example, James Cunningham's Marshal and Bad Child for Touchdown. Demons did give me a little extra and my natural sobriety and real estate nous have kept the wolves away. But anyone wanting to get into this business for big money? You'd be making a big mistake.

What was your initial inspiration for Perfect Creature?
Well, there's this theory that Stephen King talks about in On Writing that I happen to subscribe to too; at least it's a good metaphor for creating a story, anyway. Basically, to him, you don't write a story, it's already written. You are more like an archaeologist - you find a bit and uncover it, and it's all just about careful excavation from then on. I think that can be true, and it was the case with PC.
I tend to daydream a lot. And I "saw" the first few scenes of the picture very clearly in my head. Those scenes described a world where humans and vampires lived together in harmony, with humans freely sharing blood with these God-like Brothers, who were humanity's spiritual guides. However, now one of these Brothers was hunting human beings and the balance between the races was in jeopardy. And steam-punk action sequences were strong there too.
Ok, then it was like, "What the hell is that? I've never seen anything like that before", but that was the first part of the story I unearthed. From there it was research - it's always research that breaks the back of these things, and gets you thinking laterally. I went back into history and went, "Hey, the notions of the vampire are in old folk tales, maybe strange babies were born in the past, genetic variants of human that were killed off as monsters, seeding the vampire myth."
Then I led myself to the time about 300 hundred years ago, when alchemy was about to give birth to true science. But it was a time when the early scientists like Isaac Newton were also practising alchemists. And alchemy was immediately very interesting to me; the blood, the blood. And alchemy was very much "science with God included". From there it lead me to going, "Man, what if these babies were born, new kinds of babies that suckled not milk but blood. Initially they might be seen as monsters, but what if they were seen as divine, as evidence of God's hand in the world."
Boom, I was off - "That's our alternate history, for three hundred years these vampires or Brothers have been humanities spiritual guides, until now."

How long did the writing process take?
I started the script in 2001; by 2003 it was in pretty good shape.

So, what led you to form your professional relationship with producer Tim Sanders?
Well, after Demons I was looking to really push on. But at the time Dave Gibson was tied up with his TV business and beginning to put together [feature film] Castle of Lies. So I had to really look elsewhere for a producer. I think it was 2002, and I had a serviceable version of the script and was down in Dunedin to see family (my wife comes from here and we were thinking of moving back at that stage - I also strongly felt I could shoot the film in Dunedin with its wonderful architecture).
Anyway, I went in to see Ian Taylor at Taylormade and pitched him the story and suggested that ARL might like to get involved. He said yes and asked who was producing and when I said "me", he didn't laugh, but he did mention Tim Sanders. "Tim who?", was my response. Well, he produced Fellowship Of The Ring (one of my favourite films) and lives in Dunedin (one of my favorite towns), so it was serendipity.

How developed was the script when producer Tim Sanders came on board the project?
Fairly well advanced. What I found in Tim (and it's really what you need in a producer and what I had had with Dave Gibson on [debut feature film] The Irrefutable Truth About Demons)was someone who sees or reads your material and becomes a fan. Tim really dug the script, the fact that while it was highly visual and commercial, it was also rich, with a lot of layering for a genre film (Tim would probably say "classy"). He's also really smart, so there were lots of salient comments along the way; although I think my training under Dave really gave me a great grounding in how to develop scripts, something Dave does all day long.
Tim then started putting together a financial structure and putting together a great team for me. And now here we are, five years later, the only two who have been there the whole way.

What did you most enjoy about the actual shooting process?
I really hit my straps as a leader this time I think (I hope that doesn't sound arrogant). On Demons, it was pretty much a voyage into the unknown, for me. This time I knew what my role was, what I needed to focus on and that a primary goal for me is to inspire others to come up with the best ideas they can. And it really solidified for me how much I love actors; I love to go to play with them.

What did you least enjoy about it?
Night shoots. They are important, crucial to the look, as they were for Demons, but essentially, at some level, you go mental and, well, night shoots are like a vampire; fun and wild when you first meet them, but after a while they suck the life out of you.

Many directors seem quite ambivalent about the actual shoot, regarding it as a necessary evil, due to the constant compromises, pressure etc. Is that a feeling you share?
Shooting always scares the shit out of me because of the money involved and the unknown. And you know that it will be an endurance race - shooting is physically very brutal on directors; and it's terrible for producers too, because part of them (and you) is constantly waiting for something bad to happen.
But really, I love it - you really feel alive when you're doing it, you're really focused, surrounded by incredibly talented people working for your vision. It makes me feel very humble when I'm doing it and very excited. The only real downside is seeing less of the family.

How inhibiting were the number of digital effects in PC - was everything storyboarded to the last jot and tittle, or was there still room to improvise?
Everything was super planned, and on a tight budget you are then restricted about what you do. Remember too, the budget for PC was low by international standards (around US$10 million) but it looks like a lot more. That comes from planning, planning, planning.
Having said that, I was surrounded by smart people like John Shiels, who was grabbing images from the video split then roughly animating them on a laptop, so when we left a set I could see a rough of what SFX we were going to get. It was great.
But while planning is important, I think some of the interesting scenes were when I purposely let the reigns loosen a little and saw what would happen; obviously you want a backup plan in case it all goes horribly wrong.

How did you find working with DOP Leon Narbey? I imagine it'd be a bit of a thrill to work with someone so on top of their game?
He's great. Leon, as anyone who has worked with him knows, is a gentleman and an artist, a genuine painter with light. Leon helped form the look of the film in an essential way, completely sympathetically so that you feel you are watching a world, lit by its own light sources (steam driven, weirdly otherworldly industrial; revolution sciences) rather than by a modern lighting department.

What's one story about shooting Perfect Creature you can end with the phrase "… but I can laugh about it now"?
We were shooting in Oamaru, dead of winter, creating this part of the city that is very poor and dark, grimy, wintery etc. But during a southern winter it tends not to be wet but dry - cold but dry - and with these stunning light blue skies, the sun blaring down, warming your back and taking the chill away. It also blasts down onto your street and makes it look like a pleasant day to go for a stroll. So the lighting department had to erect these giant cutters (or screens) across the street to block out the sun and then chase it as it moved. So we're craning down, all this action and 50 extras, and there's no shoot off because a few inches outside of frame it's a lazy blinding sunny day. It was a serious pain in the arse.

Where do you fall on the continuum between "technocrat" and "actors' director"?
I think right in the middle. You know, I come from a visual background, fine arts. My major inspiration for storytelling outside of film, was probably novels. But as I've worked I've looked more and more closely at what actors do and studied more and more theatre, the mother lode for most actors.
I would say I am very concerned with creating a world that feels as real as it possibly can technically, and then populating it with living breathing characters. I'm really proud of the performances in PC, not just for me, but for the actors. It is of course a constant learning curve. Each film is an experiment and development in storytelling craft.

Any tips about eliciting performances from one's cast?
Well, it helps if you respect what they do. Heh. I am no expert in acting for film, the actors are. I am a collaborator - my role, I think, is too stoke up and prime their primary creative tool; their imaginations. You know, that's where good acting comes from; an actor thinking, imagining things from a character's point of view and then showing us that. My job is to shoot it so it will show off that in the best possible light, make the most of the talent, and steer, jib, sometimes growl, but mostly encourage the actor to do just the best work they've done.

What did you learn when making Demons that you were able to apply to PC?
Planning is key. Night shoots are bad, but look good if you spray lots of water around. And never give up, never ever give up.

How did you find the post process?
Because of the financial structure we had to edit and post in England - which is unfortunate as one of our strengths in NZ is in post and sound etc - so it was wrap the shoot here, head off to old Blighty with my English editor and hole up for 10 weeks to cut and wait, always wait, for CG shots to come in; the last CG shot came in on the last day at the lab in the UK. (We had to deliver and spend all the money for UK tax benefits by a certain date.)
After that, we of course had an essentially finished flick that was picked up for US distribution by Fox. After six months legal work(!) we began discussions with Fox on possible tweaks. These very quickly fell into the minor tweaking of the cards or prologue at the beginning of the film and the final frames of the picture. Otherwise there was just some general trimming in the mid section. Fairly minor but, because we opened the picture up, what was great is it enabled me to remix the already very good sound mix on the Fox stage in LA with the team who had just done War Of the Worlds. It was a thrill to watch their reactions to it - they were like, "You made this for only 10 million bucks, it looks like 40!"

What aspect of PC are you proudest of?
I think the rich, rich world we've created, inhabited by real characters who you can care about and believe really might have lived. There are some cool action scenes too.

Perfect Creature is obviously a highly original film, particularly in terms of the world and the way it's been realised, but that hasn't stopped various reviewers from reaching for their similes - "it's like the second and third Matrix movies" (in terms of one or two fight scenes, thanks to the garb of the Brothers combined with their fighting prowess); "it's like the plot of The Breed" (and yes, there are some similarities in the plot, though it's really awfully executed)… Do these comparisons (and the occasional assumption of plagiarism) pain you greatly or do you see them as an unavoidable part of being a storyteller (you know, as in there's nothing new under the sun and there are only seven basic plots available)?
It's quite funny really - often these comments will come from people who haven't even seen the film, they're comparing synopses! But look, when you step out with something, especially into the wider creative world, you have to steel yourself for this kind of thing. We now live in an age where anyone, anywhere, can comment on anything, via the internet. This is both good and bad. But as with anything, you then go to the people out there you trust; whether it's Aint it Cool [link: http://www.aintitcool.com/] or Fangoria. [link: http://www.fangoria.com] So when Tony Timpone, the editor-in-chief of Fangoria, the biggest genre mag in the States, says that PC is "one of the most unique vampire films I've ever seen, sort of a mix of Bram Stoker, Alan Moore and Charles Dickens!", well, I'm gonna believe him ahead of a 12-year-old in Idaho who's illegally downloading the movie in the first place.

What's your pitch to the NZ audience?
I think they should go and see this incredible (sorry, I'm going into sales pitch mode) world we have created - it's so rich visually, and largely created by New Zealanders too. A big, international, rich world and story.
Quite simply, it's the kind of film where you can sit down, let the lights fade and disappear into a world like you've never seen before, strangely familiar and yet alien.
And there are layers in the story, it's not just a run and jump or hack and slash movie, it has thought-provoking ideas if you want to explore them. We wanted to make a rich feast as opposed to a quick takeaway. On one level I love the fact my teenage daughter loved it and the fact that so did Ian Mune.

With the delay in Perfect Creature being released, have you felt blocked at all in terms of developing/writing your next movie before PC has been delivered to the world?
No, Tim and I are pushing forward on Poisoned Earth, and we also have a deal with Lakeshore in LA for a big budget sci-fi called Thief of Europe. I've also written three other scripts, all originals, and I'm proud of every single one. The reality is, if Poisoned Earth is my next film, that journey would have started in 2001. There are three or four other scripts I'm actively developing that I will (I hope) be saying the same thing about in another five or 10 years. It's really a game for long distance runners. In other words, for people who just would be doing this even if they weren't getting paid. I mean if I was an archaeologist (as I trained to be initially) I'd still be writing stories and scripts and probably driving my friends and family crazy by making them read them.

So would it be safe to assume that none of the scripts you've written is, say, a contemporary romantic comedy, or am I being terribly reductive in concluding you tend to be drawn to darker genre movies?
Poisoned Earth is sci-fi/horror. I've also developed a noir in recent years (as in Blood Simple rather than a detective story), a sci-fi noir (as in a detective story), and I'm actively developing a supernatural thriller called the Diary of an Occultist. So they're all in a certain zone. Although some, in tone, may end up being less dark. But I do like all those genres. And I believe that it is quite often in genre movies where you find the best and most exciting filmmaking in the world today.