“Dune: Part Two” kinematographer Greig Fraser’s work with Denis Villeneuve’s adaptation of the classic Frank Herbert Sci-Fi novel is so beautiful, every image he shot could be framed and hung on a wall-so that is exactly what they did.
A brand new exhibition, Denis Villeneuve’s “Dune: Exposures”, goes to the end of the month in Leica Gallery in Los Angeles and illuminates the Kinematographer’s work (currently nominated for an Oscar for his work). Together with photographs taken by phrases, the exhibition has text by “Dune” star Josh Brolin. (If you can’t get to the gallery, you can pick up the photo book “Dune: Exposures”, wherever books are sold.)
Thewrap went around the exhibition with phrases, who talked about what the shots were like, what did “Dune: Part Two” different and what his next challenge will be.
(Which indicates the image of Rebecca Ferguson, hugged, with Villeneuve talking to her) Where’s this? I imagine in the great pyramid at Arrakis?
This is for the first movie. It’s a scene we shot for the first movie. But what I love about it is that it is Rebecca in a very vulnerable place like Jessica, and he is his beauty for her. As for me, this summarizes a fantastic director. It is a picture that my mind summarizes a fantastic director.
He seems to be a master stylist who is equally attentive to the artists.
He is beyond amazing with the actors. One thing that I kind of squeezes is that I had to testify to a masterful director who makes at the top of his crafts for two films. And it was fantastic.
You have said that you deliberately tried to mix it for “Part two.” Can you talk to me about your philosophy?
We deliberately made “Part two” more IMAX-friendly. We really wanted to make sure the structure came through, but also that we were in an IMAX world, so we really pushed for the big screen, great picture experience, much more than on “part 1.” We use IMAX to tell Paul’s journey, basically from the small, small sleepy Caladan to the big city of Arrakis, which comes out into the desert that grows up.
(Now in a photo with the Gladiator scene with Austin Butler, which is shot with infrared cameras) Is this infrared or just black and white?
Just black and white. However, it is a double exposure. It looks infrared. You know why, because the movie stocks are everything granulated, as if it is an old, has expired layer. The emulsion starts to scale off and does not sit perfectly.
Can you talk about that scene?
What I love about it is that Denis and I went back and forth a few times about not doing it because there is so much something you can’t go back from. You can’t fix it. If we have a change in the heart, we will not fix it. We went, Shouldn’t we? And then we just went, F it. Do it. Since it is exactly the kind of spirit that this movie means, that is, you roll the dice.
(There is a photo of Stellan Skarsgård, in full makeup, which sits in a tent.) Talk about this shot.
I just love the fact that it’s so invalid. There is some story that is built around filmmaking, everyone behind the scenes is a little exciting and fun. But the reality is that filmmaking can be quite relentless and tired and bland. And you have this, one of the biggest villains, I think, in history, naked, sits in a tent with a fluorescent lamp.
How did Brolin get into this “exposure project”?
As a photographer, I now come to have done this almost 30 plus years. I don’t get as excited by pictures as I once did, and I think it’s a natural thing, because if I make hundreds of pictures every day, then there will be a point where pictures themselves, of them are not as interesting to me. But when I read Brolin’s writer, not for this, but I read some of his writers on Instagram, and he gave me some things to read when we made the movie. It colored my senses. It tickled my senses. I went to see the Van Gogh exhibition with Josh at the National Gallery in London a couple of weeks ago. And while we all know that Van Gogh is an incredible artist, I was more drawn to the scriptures on the wall of van Gogh. And I think that what is beautiful about this, and his writing, is that there is color of his words.
Was there something there when you put things together, you thought, Let’s get him here. Or had he already written things that became a contribution?
The book (and the exhibition) is because we did it together. I feel that I have expelled my visual desire by making the movie, being a cinematographer, while these pictures, I feel good, they are really good and I am really proud of them. They are better with his writing. This is the same reason why we need a movie. A movie is not just pictures, it’s pictures and history. It is a combination of everything together.
