NEW YORK (AP) ā Over the four years heās spent working on Barry Jenkins estimates that heās been asked why he wanted to make it at least 400 times.
The question of why , the filmmaker of and and would want to jump into the big-budget, photorealistic animated Disney world of lions and tigers has bedeviled much of a film world that reveres him.
Countless other directors had made leaps into CGI-heavy blockbuster-making before. But Jenkinsā decision was uniquely analyzed ā perhaps because thereās no more heralded, or trusted, filmmaker today under the age of 50 than Jenkins.
āIt just thought it was something I could not deny,ā Jenkins says. āI had to do it.ā
āMufasa,ā which opens in theaters Friday, brings together movie worlds that ordinarily stay very far apart. On the one hand, you have the Oscar-winning, 45-year-old director of some of the most luminous and lyrical films of the past decade. On the other, you have the intellectual property imperatives of todayās Hollywood. What happens when they collide?
The result in āMufasa,ā about the lion cub's orphaned upbringing set both before and after the events of Jon Favreau's is an uncommonly textured and thoughtfully rendered spectacle that, Jenkins maintained in a recent interview, has more in common with āM“ǓDzԱō¾±²µ³ó³Łā than youād think. Made with virtual filmmaking tools, āMufasaā essentially plopped one of the most groundbreaking filmmakers working today into an all-digital playground, with a budget more than a hundred times that of āMoonlight.ā
Often in āMufasa,ā you can feel Jenkinsā sensibility warming and enhancing what can, in other less sensitively commanded films, feel soulless. With songs by , āMufasaā works as a big-movie entertainment and, even more surprisingly, as a Barry Jenkins film.
āMy head was spinning when this started,ā Jenkins says. āIt actually reminded me of when I first got into filmmaking. This felt oddly enough very similar to that first experience. You can sort of run away from that newness and be intimidated by it, or you can embrace it, learn the things you donāt know and then start to bend it.ā
Itās also an experience that has quite evidently changed Jenkins, exponentially expanding his filmmaking tool kit while opening his eyes to new ways of making movies. āIt was almost like learning a new language,ā Jenkins says of the process. These are edited excerpts from the conversation.
AP: How many times have you been asked why you did this movie?
Jenkins: At least 400 times. But it came down to the spirit and the warmth of Jeff Nathansonās script and also the spirit and the warmth I always found in the story. I came to āThe Lion Kingā by babysitting my nephews way, way back in the 1990s. My sister was a single mom and Iād be at home watching with the kids. Youād put on different VHSs and āThe Lion Kingā was always the one that stuck. I just thought: Wouldnāt it be interesting to, coming out of something like āThe Underground Railroadā to step into this thing thatās so full of light?
AP: Had you been actively seeking something lighter after those projects?
JENKINS: Maybe warmer, lighter but still just as deep, just as spiritual. This idea of family legacy, of finding your place in the world, those are things that are very present in āM“ǓDzԱō¾±²µ³ó³Łā and āThe Underground Railroad.ā If I was telling you, āIām going to make this film about this kid who has this almost biblical experience involving water and a parent figure that he then gets displaced from, and has to find his place in the world, I could be talking about āM“ǓDzԱō¾±²µ³ó³Łā or I could be talking about āMufasa.ā
AP: Were you motivated by expanding yourself as a filmmaker? Or the notions people have of you as a filmmaker?
JENKINS: It wasnāt about the notions of who people thought I was. But I was looking to expand just the kind of filmmaking I was doing at that point. This came right in the thick of pretty much a seven-year cycle, from beginning āM“ǓDzԱō¾±²µ³ó³Łā to being in post on āThe Underground Railroad,ā the way this movie is made, with this virtual production, itās just a very new way of making films. Thereās maybe been five or six movies made with this technology.
AP: Did you find you could carry your sensibility into virtual filmmaking?
JENKINS: I did. We evolved this process to the point where we could create so much of all the world and the movement in virtual space, and we could then take our virtual cameras into virtual production. We evolved the animation to the point where we could create the light, we could create the set, we could create the environment. (Cinematographer) James (Laxton) would be there and I would be there, and weāre blasting the voices of the actors into the room and the animators are moving through and Iām directing the blocking, and the camera is responding to the blocking in real time.
AP: It seemed like you were putting particular emphasis on close-ups. In the virtual space, were you playing with where to put the camera?
JENKINS: Absolutely. Look, Iām a filmmaker who was on set with āMoonlight,ā Iāve got 25 days and the sun is going down. Yeah, youāre trying to find a place for the camera, you have ideas, but those ideas arenāt practically achievable. In this sense, the camera could be anywhere. It could be everywhere. Itās sort of the same questions but the possibility of answering is so immediate and direct.
AP: You recently told Vulture, though, that the digital process was ānot your thing." Are you eager to return to physical filmmaking?
JENKINS: I want to unpack what you just said. Weāve been talking, and Iāve been talking about using these tools to create a very physical, in-person experience. I donāt consider this a project thatās all digital and all computer animated. If I made this movie again right now, it wouldnāt take me four years. Itād probably take me two and a quarter. If I was going to do another one of these films, I would have such a stronger foundation. It wouldnāt feel like something thatās alien or something thatās other or thatās all digital. It would just feel like filmmaking.
AP: So you see āMufasaā more as part of a continuum for you personally?
JENKINS: One thousand percent. I love through this process Iāve learned so many other ways of making a film that I just could not learn making something like āThe Underground Railroad.ā What I love now is the overlap between the two of them. When I began this process, I talked to Matt Reeves because I had heard he had used some of these tools to pre-vis āThe Batman.ā He said, āDo you know that shot where the Penguin is in his car and Batman is walking upside down? I discovered that in the volume.ā I said, āOf course you did.ā I was like, Oh my God, we could have pre-vised āM“ǓDzԱō¾±²µ³ó³Łā with this technology.
AP: Do you think itās necessary for a filmmaker today to be aware of these techniques?
JENKINS: One thousand percent. The light can be anywhere in this film and the camera can be anywhere. That doesnāt mean it should be everywhere. The next time I go out to make a film whether itās something like āThe Underground Railroadā or āBeale Street,ā James and I are probably going to incorporate these tools as well. Because figuring out the light is half the battle, as they say in āG.I. Joe.ā
AP: So do you feel changed as a filmmaker by this experience?
JENKINS: This is all new. Itās all being developed right now. We went down to āAvatarā and spoke to the engineers there. They heard what we were trying to do and sent some people to embed with us and they helped us evolve our process, so we could have these animators with two legs move as if they have four legs. What Iām saying is: This is the wild, wild West.
Jake Coyle, The Associated Press