Playing With Fire: When fire breaks out on Chicago Fire, it’s real.

By Michael Fickes

Photo: Matt Dinerstein/NBC. Copyright NBC Universal, Inc.    

Fires – real fires – rank as major characters in Chicago Fire.

Director of Photography Lisa Wiegand and Special Effects Coordinator John Milinac carefully plan the fires for the NBC show from prolific hit-maker Dick Wolf. 

Milinac works with his crew to design and install networks of pipes that jut out of the floor and ceiling for the fire sets – often built in a warehouse. Then, the crew pumps fuel for a fire into the pipes. For safety, camera operators and dolly grips don fire retardant automotive racing suits before the shoot.

In a typical scene, fire trucks drive up to the building – a real building in Chicago with real flames from fireboxes installed in the windows. “The cameras, two ARRI ALEXAS, are always with the firefighters,” Wiegand said. “So the audience discovers problems along with the firefighters.”

Starting fires

Inside, Milinac brings the fire in each pipe up to a planned and pre-tested level. The actors wear firefighter bunker gear – protective clothing and equipment that can withstand high temperatures. “John is always there, along with Stunt Coordinator Rick Le Fevour,” Wiegand said. “If something goes wrong, they will turn off the fuel and put the fire out.”

Holding back fire

Onscreen, the scenes look extraordinarily dangerous. In one scene inside a multistory downtown apartment building, a character named Matthew Casey (Jesse Spencer) herds two residents into a room with a window and slams the door on the growing fire that has blocked their escape route down a stairwell. 

Firefighters outside must raise a ladder to the window. While they work, the raging fire pushes against the door. Casey braces his back against the door to keep it shut. The pressure from the fire pushes the door ajar and flames lick around the openings. Casey pushes the fire back and the fire pushes Casey back. He bounces back and forth, moving a foot or more each time. That better not be real fire coming through the openings around the door.

“It was real,” said Wiegand. “But it looks worse than it was. Casey wasn’t moving very much, and the shot was dull. Then Reza Tabrizi, the camera operator, tried zooming way in and way out rapidly and repeatedly. It worked and gave the scene all that energy.”

The crew carries three Angenieux Optimo lightweight zooms for each ALEXA: 15mm-40mm, 28mm-76mm and 45mm-120mm. Then there are two primes: 135mm and 150mm for each camera. The lightweight lenses facilitate handheld shots, which make up 90 percent of each show. Two 12:1 Angenieux Optimos handle studio shots. 

Speed counts

Chicago Fire is a demanding show. Every scene, even the difficult rescue scenes, must move quickly. Large crews facilitate that. “My departments dealing strictly with photographic concerns number 30 to 50 depending on the day,” Wiegand said.

Technology helps. The show uses Burbank-based FotoKem’s nextLab, an automated software solution for productions shot in high-definition digital video files.

“We set up look-up-tables or LUTs before the season,” said Scott Rader, VFX supervisor on Chicago Fire and creative director at Spy, a post-production house with offices in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

“The LUTs are digital files that contain color specifications for various scenes,” continued Rader. “For example, Lisa wants a certain look for the interior of the firehouse during the day. There is a LUT that contains color and lighting specifications for those scenes – and there are LUTs for other kinds of scenes.”

When the digital video loads into nextLAB, the software downloads the appropriate LUT for each scene, attaching each to the appropriate video files. “That corrects 90 percent of the color,” Rader said. “We fix the rest during final color correction.”

It’s an innovative system that is slowly replacing disk drive storage. Rader also is in charge of VFX fire. Although the fire scenes are real, Rader’s team often makes them bigger, smokier and scarier, while painting out the safety riggings and harnesses that keep the actors safe during the shoot. So while Lisa Wiegand can scare you with a zoom lens, Rader does it with animation software.

Commercial Music

With the 2013 Clio Awards taking place this month (May 15 in N.Y.C.), I've been thinking about some of my favorite commercials. In today's DVR world, most American television viewers (and I suspect most TV viewers around the world) tend to fast-forward ("skip") through the commercials while watching their favorite programs. However, I actually enjoy commercials and am keen to find the next spot that will make me laugh, cry, or scour the Internet looking for the song used in the campaign.

Some of my favorite campaigns over the years have come from Publix Supermarkets, Heineken, Subaru, and Apple.

What appeals to me in finding those next great commercials is the writing. As a writer myself, I am acutely aware of the creativity involved in being able to tell a story in a 60-second or 30-second spot – one that not only is memorable, but a story in which the viewers are able to identify with the people or situation. And the advertiser hopes you would, in turn, want to purchase their product. It's astonishing how much of a story can be told in so little time.

Of course, we all know that these great stories must be filmed and edited, and that's where the talented readers of Markee 2.0 Magazine come in, right? With our "Making Commercials" articles, we highlight the talent and creativity involved in making some of television's best spots.

The music and sound found in television commercials also can draw a great deal of attention. Think of the early iPod campaigns or the Nike ad from 1987 when "Revolution" became the first Beatles track to be featured in a spot. Just as in film, music can play a key role in making a commercial memorable.

Throughout its history, Gap Inc., has strived to make its commercials memorable through music, from Madonna and Daft Punk to The Avett Brothers and now, Ki:Theory. As Markee contributor Michael Fickes described in a recent article ("What Color is the Music?"), "Few brands have a commercial footprint as recognizable as The Gap. Gap commercials are recognizable after a few frames of white scrim and a few bars of music." Indeed. Have you seen the ad Fickes describes? The image below from the commercial links to the full ad on YouTube.

Men in Hats

A&E's Longmire. Warner Bros. Television Entertainment/Ursula Coyote©2012 WBEI. 

If you watch a great deal of television (if you’re reading this blog, then I assume you do), you’ve probably noticed a trend of late: There are a lot of men in hats. And I don’t mean some character trying to look hip by wearing an ill-fitting straw fedora. I am talking about characters who wouldn’t be the same without their hats; the hats are an extension – or perhaps a reflection – of who they are. Such accouterment helps viewers get into the story – and certainly helps the actors get into character. I’m rarely seen without some sort of chapeau, so this is a trend I can get behind.

Allow me to run down a list of some of the shows to which I am referring: Longmire (A&E), Dallas (TNT), Vegas (CBS, premieres Sept. 25), Justified (FX), Hell on Wheels (AMC), and Copper (BBC America). Granted, most of these programs are period dramas, reflecting times in which few men left their homes without a hat. Still, I think there is a deeper issue here than simply the idea of producing a TV show set in the Old West (Hell on Wheels) or Civil War-era New York (Copper).

These shows are reminders that America used to have ideals about working hard, living off the land, and actually producing tangible goods. The work was tough, but the men were tougher. Men wore hats more so out of need rather than want of being fashionable. They were outdoors all day – rain or shine – getting things done. Hats provided protection from the elements. Most of us today work in office buildings, sitting in front of computer screens. No hat is required for that!

Sure, we’re looking at our history through a romanticized lens. Everything wasn’t rosy, and these shows reflect that in many ways. But even today, you can look at a character on TV, or a man on the street for that matter, and know his character based solely on his choice of hat. One glance at Robert Taylor as Sheriff Walt Longmire, and you know he’s a gritty, no-nonsense lawman. There’s a heavy burden on this man’s soul, and that brown wool hat is the only thing keeping him from falling apart.

I don’t lament progress, and I don’t hate my desk job. I don’t wish to live in another era. But like the producers and viewers of these TV shows (I particularly enjoy Longmire and Hell on Wheels), I enjoy escaping into a world where the good guys wear hats – cowboy hats. 

Film is dead. Long live film.

IMAX film negative. Copyright 2012 Company Films LLC.

Is it time to stop referring to movies as “films”? This is a question I’ve been pondering since June, when I read that movie studios will cease producing film prints for major markets by the end of 2013. At the very least, should we stop referring to new movies as films? In most cases, what we’re watching these days was recorded digitally – no celluloid involved. Hardly anything in theaters or on TV is “filmed” anymore; it’s recorded to hard drives. (There are exceptions, such as ABC’s Castle, which we noted here: http://markeemag.com/Article/613/.) So this leaves me wondering if we need a new term for digital movies, or if we just refer to them simply as “movies.”

My only hesitation is that, for as long as I can remember, I have differentiated between movies that simply were made for entertainment (“movies”) and those also made with the intent to educate, inform, document and, perhaps, change the world in some small way (“films”). How would I make this distinction in the future? Fast and Furious 20 certainly is not the same form of entertainment as March of the Penguins. 

I posed this question recently on Quora. (Please add your two cents: http://b.qr.ae/PdpwJb.) Chris Keath, director of production workflows at Current TV, was kind enough to answer. He said: “I see no need. ‘Movie’ and ‘Film’ are already more or less inter-changeable terms for a general public point of view. It may fall out of fashion over time, but I find the whole notion of being able to intentionally remove a common definition from the public lexicon to be pretty suspect.”

I am inclined to agree. For now, let’s leave well enough alone. I suppose we may not need an ideological push in the direction of referring to all films as movies; it may eventually happen without our consent. As our technologies change, so does our vocabulary. For example, we don’t tape our favorite music or TV programs anymore; we simply record them. And many people have taken to using the acronym DVR as a verb. (“I DVR’d that show so I can watch it later.”) So until we’re all DVR’ing documentary “movies” to our web-enabled wristwatches and eyeglasses, you can find me at the multiplex viewing the latest silent “film” from France. 

Note:
There are some in Hollywood looking to make a distinction as well – or least trying to make sense of how this digital transition will affect their business and their lives. For instance, actor Keanu Reeves produced a documentary titled Side by Side, which aims to investigate the history, process and workflow of both digital and photochemical film creation. According to the project's website (http://sidebysidethemovie.com/), "Through interviews with directors, cinematographers, film students, producers, technologists, editors, and exhibitors, Side by Side examines all aspects of filmmaking – from capture to edit, visual effects to color correction, distribution to archive. At this moment when digital and photochemical filmmaking coexist, Side by Side explores what has been gained, what is lost, and what the future might bring."

Fairy Tale TV is ‘Must-See’ TV

Grimm's Monroe (Silas Weir Mitchell), seen here in his CG Bludbot incarnation created by HIVE-FX of Portland, Ore. Photo: HIVE-FX

With few exceptions, compelling TV dramas used to be the exclusive property of cable/satellite channels. This was not because network shows were subject to more stringent regulations regarding colorful language and nudity. Often, the cable shows simply had bigger budgets for their original dramas, because they may only be producing a few at a time – and for a shorter season than is typical of network TV. Sure, you could rely on your Big Three networks for passable one-hour dramas and the occasional made-for-television movie or miniseries, but for gripping, human drama, one had to be willing to pay for the viewing privilege. Millions of Americans, myself included, have been – and will continue to be – eager to spend a monthly fee to view series such as Band of Brothers and The Sopranos (HBO), Mad Men (AMC), Battlestar Galactica (Syfy), and Homeland (Showtime). However, during the last few years, the major networks have turned their attention toward producing better dramatic series with sizeable casts, big budgets, and even on-location shooting.

Programs such as The West Wing (NBC), Lost (ABC), NCIS (CBS) and now Grimm (NBC) have brought creative storytelling, captivating action, and high production values back to the masses. Grimm, as featured in the May/June issue of Markee, is the latest TV drama to charm the U.S. television viewing audience. In fact, its recent May season finale won its Friday night timeslot with nearly 6 million viewers.

Grimm is a rather unique program that reinterprets the well-known “Grimm’s Fairy Tales” with a modern twist. Portland police detective Nick Burkhardt (David Giuntoli) has inherited the ability to see supernatural creatures, and as a “Grimm,” he is tasked with keeping the balance between mankind and the mythological. There’s truly nothing like it on TV, so Christine Bunish spoke with the show’s visual effects team at HIVE-FX to learn how some of Grimm’s scariest monsters are created as viewers watch them change from their human forms. 

As you will see in our May/June issue, the production values of today’s network dramas certainly are on par with those of the pay channels. And the success of effects-heavy programming such as Grimm should lead to more shows in that vein. In turn, that will put more VFX artists and companies to work, the prospect of which pleases me a great deal.  

If you've never seen the show, be sure to catch up on Grimm during its hiatus, and tune in this fall when it returns.

NAB 2012

One of the more interesting booths at NAB 2012, TVLogic's doll display.

Working in business-to-business publishing means going to trade shows. And when you cover a variety of industries, as we do here at Lionheart, that means frequent travel to trade shows. In fact, the editors and others staffers at Lionheart cover some of the largest trade shows held in North America, including the World of Concrete and the NAB Show. As executive editor of Markee 2.0, it is my pleasure to cover NAB.

Actually, as you may have read in my March/April editor's letter, this was my first chance to attend NAB since joining Markee. I must say, I have covered many large trade shows in the past, but none seem to have the energy of NAB. The attendees were fully enthused to be there, the exhibitors were excited to greet everyone, and the exhibits themselves were the largest and most impressive I've seen. The only down side I could find was that all of the sights and sounds from the equipment manufacturers, software developers and components producers was a bit overwhelming. The best way to get through it, I found, was to narrow my focus by industry and map out my daily tours accordingly. After all, the exhibits were open for four days, so there was plenty of time to see it all – barely.

What I came away with – as is the intention of most editors who attend such events – is a working knowledge of new technologies available for my readers, a glimpse of where the industries Markee covers are headed, a new appreciation for the work of all those involved in TV and film production, and a notebook filled with article ideas. I can't wait to get started!

I want to thank the NAB staff and organizers for producing an outstanding event. And I wish to thank all the companies and their representatives who took the time to speak with me. Look for post-event coverage on our website and in our e-newsletter. (Sign up for the newsletter here.)

Holiday Classics

For many of us, one of the great pleasures of the holiday season is watching our favorite Christmas movies and TV specials. Just like the holidays themselves, these shows and films spark childhood memories of innocent times when our only cares were what would be waiting for us under the tree on Christmas morning, or which of our favorite cousins would be waiting for us at our grandparents' house when we arrived for the annual holiday meal.

Like me, it likely was in your grandparents' living room where you watched many of these holiday classics – such as It's a Wonderful Life or Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Reindeer – for the first time. Thus, we have a great deal of affection for these classics (which is why they are referred to as classics in the first place) and tend to make them holiday traditions with our own children. My personal favorites tend to be animated, such as A Charlie Brown Christmas and How the Grinch Stole Christmas. But thinking about these old standards this year has me wondering, are there any "new classics" out there? Are there any recently produced Christmas movies or TV specials that will earn a place among the holiday classics?

Every year there is a new crop of holiday programming and new films in theaters, but can you think of any that deserve to be called classics? The movie, Elf, is funny and airs on TV quite often this time of year, but it's not heart-warming enough to become a classic. Home Alone is much-loved, but again, can one consider it classic? I, for one, cannot. I think Tim Burton has come the closest to producing a new classic with The Nightmare Before Christmas. (Burton wrote and produced the film, which was directed by Henry Selick.) Close, but no cigar, as the saying goes. Don't get me wrong; I adore this claymation film, but I don't anticipate watching it every December. Perhaps there is a younger crowd out there that does.

On television, some more recent programming has tried to acknowledge older TV classics, such as Rudolph, with old-school style animated programs, though they tend to do so with a sense of humor. Last year's Community (NBC) holiday episode (pictured) and the recent holiday episode of Eureka (Syfy) spring to mind. Both shows were quite funny, especially if you're familiar with the material that is being lampooned, but they're certainly not destined to become classics.

So, what are your favorite holiday shows and movies? Please share your memories and family traditions with us.

About the image: Community (NBC) Christmas episode, Dec. 2010. Image courtesy of Eden FX. Originally appeared in Markee Nov/Dec 2010 issue.