"And That's For My Old Gaffer!"

Have you ever noticed how, in a film’s credits, the cinematographer is given a major billing while a gaffer is listed all the way near the bottom?  It made me realize that while most any cinematography-enthusiast in the world can easily tell you that the DP on APOCALYPSE NOW, one of the most visually interesting films ever made, was Vittorio Storaro, I don’t think any of them would know the name of the film’s gaffer!!  (Incidentally, it‘s Luciano Galli, who also gaffed LAST TANGO IN PARIS, and was a chief electrician on NOVECENTO).

I bring this up because in working on my new film HAVANA IN BUSHWICK, I’ve come to see the role a gaffer plays in a film‘s overall cinematography.  The use (or, in some cases, absence) of lighting plays such a key role in the shot composition and image clarity that, in truth, I feel that a camera operator and gaffer share equal importance in the role of Cinematographer.  And one thing a gaffer needs is breathing space to be his own artist!

I’ve always been open about the fact that I’m a writer more than I am a director and not really a visual stylist.  My first film, FIGHTING NIRVANA, is a very visually boring film.  Of course I want to improve and learn how to do everything, but I'm not there yet.  I just automatically tend to think of a script in terms of the story, not how to make it visually interesting.  My advice to any novice filmmaker out there is to give your crew semi-complete creative freedom in order for you to learn.  Of course, there are exceptions: your DP may not have talent worth shit and, without being given direction, will give you a film that looks like a badly-shot reality show (I‘ve been there).  But, assuming you have a crew with talent, as I would say for my team, give them room to shoot interestingly, make their own decisions, and experiment.  In a sense, they are actors too, and they are doing a little bit of improvising.

Both CITIZEN KANE and THE GODFATHER, two indisputable masterpieces, are notable in that their respective directors gave their cinematographers complete carte-blanche to do whatever they wanted.  Gordon Willis has claimed full authorship for the visual structure of THE GODFATHER TRILOGY, and Coppola confirmed this, saying the only creative input he had on the cinematography was just hiring Willis.  And Welles of course has cited his own ignorance in filmmaking as being what allowed him to discard conventions and do new things with Gregg Toland. 

In my own experience, you can have a film shoot where the director doesn’t get along with the cast, or with the producers, or with the composer, and still they somehow forge a masterpiece.  But the relationship between the director and the cinematographer MUST be good or a film will suffer.  And having a DP who will give you amazing shots, and a gaffer who’ll say “Hey, you know what, let me use a different color gel than I’ve used before” will strengthen your masterpiece all the more.  In the end, the quality of a film’s look is a reflection on its direction.