Original subtitles

Ever since his debut in 1969, Italian director Dario Argento

keeps on terrorizing millions of viewers all over the world.

The themes of his films deal with violence, terror,

emotions, anguish, and nightmares.

Nightmare in its most absolute form.

Why do I keep making these haunting, brutal films?

That's something I get asked, and ask myself, all the time.

It's not like my imagination can't focus on anything else.

I mean, I love music and I enjoy having a good laugh.

Why do I make these films, then?

I don't know, I guess it's due to my dark half.

Maybe the monster inside me resurfaces pretty often,

overcoming my regular, more relaxed lifestyle.

I often find myself scared by my weird, creepy thoughts.

They're coming from deep inside my being.

After traveling the weirdest paths of one's imagination,

coming back to earth is a challenge.

People ask me how I choose the stories for my projects.

I can't give you a proper answer, truth be told.

I never know when I'll decide what my next film will be.

Sometimes, when I think a story is good,

it feels like a virus or a fever running through my body.

When this feeling isn't strong enough,

it means I still have to work on the idea.

I do so by merely strolling around, looking at things.

Loneliness is a pivotal element in all of my projects;

it's the only thing that allows me to focus

and step into that strange, cruel, and perverse universe.

Watching an Argento film at the cinema is a bit of a ritualistic experience.

Sitting down in a room engulfed in darkness,

the audience can't avert their eyes from the screen

as they witness a haunting story of blood and violence,

the kind of story which, should they witness in their everyday life,

would make them shiver and recoil in disgust for real.

It sounds almost like a collective, liberating ritual,

with the whole audience merging into a single soul as they watch these movies.

That's one of the interpretations behind the success Argento and his ilk

have been enjoying in recent years.

These films couldn't be further from

a pastime for alienated kooks that some people make them out to be.

They have a complex, deeper significance.

Aside from being an amusing source of escapism,

they also deal with deeper themes,

which often revolve around our daily lives and consciences.

They often revolve around our relationship with fear and death,

as well as many other unfathomable mysteries.

However, Dario Argento isn't only known for the shocking plots of his films,

but also because of his experimentation with new shooting techniques.

A director can achieve a personal style by joining story with technique.

I mean, almost everyone owns a camera or even a camcorder,

and we all know we could move or point it in any direction.

A panning shot is one way to tell a story, for instance.

Yet, we could experiment with the camera in order to achieve some,

dare I say, acrobatic performances.

As I said, it's almost like getting a show out of the camera itself.

This exercise is not an end in itself, though.

There are countless ways to tell a story through a camera.

You can move it very high or very low, put it in a hole,

make it pass through a human hand, place it inside a mouth, and so on.

Having technical skills is important, but that's not all there is to it.

I've made plenty of use of these so-called acrobatic,

complex sequences throughout my career.

In my opinion, the stories I've wanted to tell called for

such daring and complicated sequences.

I often say my camera movements are "psychological,"

as if they portray an idea of what a scene, or even the whole film, is about.

I could give many examples,

such as a shot from TENEBRAE, a couple from OPERA,

a few from SUSPIRIA, or even from THE BIRD WITH THE CRYSTAL PLUMAGE.

Here is an example of the type of shot mentioned by Dario Argento.

This scene is from TENEBRAE.

It consists of a remarkably long and breathtaking camera movement that

creates tension by exploring almost the entirety of an apartment,

inside and out, thanks to a complex telescopic mechanism

mounted on a remote-controlled arm.

Another example of Dario Argentds - eeeformidable techfiicahmasterym

This solution gives an even more shocking effect

to the sequence you're about to see. The film is, again, OPERA.

Notice how Argento makes use of the music,

how he underlines these small visual details.

Notice also the tilted framing he intentionally gives these shots.

Argento makes the most out of his technical skills. It has become his signature style.

The overhead, circular motion of the camera in this scene is yet another example.

Shooting the final sequence of OPERA was another arduous task,

for which Argento had a huge mechanical crane built

in order to perfectly replicate the point of view of a flying crow.

And here's how the scene appears in the finished film.

Betty!

- Got him! - Great plan, Marc!

Here I come!

Almost there...

Almost...

There.

See, this is the embodiment of a special effects sequence.

I risked falling down and painting those walls with myself,

as well as almost drowning in that pool of water down below.

Filthy, slimy water, who knows how many germs it carries.

This is an example of a dangerous situation in a film.

As a matter of fact, it's also an example of what special effects can do.

I mean, you don't see actors getting killed for real in a film.

It's a trick, a special effect.

Even this dangerous setting is a special effect.

I'm a little out of breath right now but, well,

this skit served as an introduction to our segment about special effects.

Hope you'll enjoy it.

Sorry for this goofy goodbye, people, but I can't risk falling down! Bye!

The scene we have just seen is a perfect example

Try to blink! Go!

Give me some fast blinking!

Keep them open! Open!

Keep them open and try screaming, "No!"

He got stabbed! His body is at your feet!

He's right here, at your feet.

The special effects team, led by Rosario Prestopino,

puts great care and attention "irfrfin nrlrlinn cnrno rnr§rjn_r\|c>'I-r|-i|c_ IIILU uuklllls JUIIIC lllUl C UULUITD

a scene where the make-up and special effects artists really gave their best.

Yeah, all right. I'm coming.

This scene depicting the death of Daria Nicolodfs character

involves the entire make-up and special effects teams.

The main part of this task was obviously played by the make-up team,

who had to first create the eye wound to apply on the actress' face.

The make-up team has prepared a fake exit wound for the bullet,

which will be now applied to the nape of the actress' neck.

The fake wound has been filled with artificial blood.

A small squib, placed under a fake layer of hair,

was then detonated during shooting at Dario Argentds command.

That's how the director managed to simulate the devastating effect of a bullet.

As always, Dario Argento himself applied

the final touches to the make-up team's work.

The bullet through the keyhole effect was created by filming an enlarged bullet prop,

which was done with a high speed camera normally used for scientific testing.

And here, from the film OPERA, is the final result of all this work.

I'm a creator of special effects.

I mostly work for Dario Argento.

I usually do mechanical effects for him.

For instance, Dario needed some mechanical crows for the film OPERA,

because a real bird would not have been as effective as a fake one.

We couldn't have done the scene with the crows attacking the killer using real ones.

I faced a similar situation in DEMONS 2,

as well as in the last film Dario produced, THE SECT,

which has scenes with fantasy versions of birds and rabbits.

The situation is the same when a film features a monster,

because, when I get involved, it's often for monstrous creations that

have internal mechanisms to make them move independently.

There are many creatures in THE CHURCH, as well.

In the film you can see, usually in dream sequences,

a few monstrous beings.

The most complicated one to create was the goat demon.

It was accomplished using a combination of

make-up and mechanics.

It was a high quality foam latex suit worn by an actor,

processed through quite complex procedures.

This suit was worn by an actor,

but the movements of the goat's face were controlled

by various electrical and electronic mechanisms.

Therefore, it was both a suit worn by an actor as well as an animatronic creature,

whose facial expressions were remote-controlled.

There were other special effects in the film,

such as the monster coming out of holy water.

Dario's films feature more than just make-up and optical special effects.

There are also other kinds of special effects,

including stop-motion and other optical techniques.

For example, there is a scene where an insect enters an actress' nose.

Of course, we could not use the actress' real head,

and we also had to figure out how to get the insect inside a fake nose.

We were able to solve the situation by using a blend

of make-up and optical special effects,

creating a cast of the actress' head and a pseudo animation

to show the insect getting into the nose.

I also do optical effects, as I was saying,

which are often useful for dealing with apparently simpler issues,

such as the lunar eclipse in THE SECT.

It's obviously not possible to delay production to wait for the next eclipse.

They needed an ad hoc effect, and that's exactly what I did.

These kinds of effects are often achieved through the use of an optical printer.

Shots can be manipulated and effects inserted by using filters or images.

Any kind of fantasy elements can be added or recreated.

In this case, we actually added a realistic element, a lunar eclipse.

My writing partnership with Argento began with FGUi? FLiES 0N” GREY VELVET.

Normal movie cameras usually reach 24 fps.

Argento is constantly pushing his technical skills to the limit,

and the same goes for the special effects he uses.

That's the reason I find working with him so exciting and intriguing.

Nothing is ever good enough for him.

He always strives to find new ideas and solutions.

He always tries to take routes no one has explored before.

I remember our collaboration on PHENOMENA.

An interesting experience, as I also had to use macro photography

to take extreme close-ups of insects.

I showed these insects almost as if they were actors,

because that was what Argento wanted.

I think it was the first film to use this kind of cinematic technique.

Stivaletti and I also realized another unusual effect Argento used in the film,

with the swarm of flies covering the school.

Those girls trapped inside the school,

with millions of insects swarming outside the windows, was a terrifying sight.

We created the swarm using an optical effect.

First, we did a normal shot of the school,

then we simulated the swarm by immersing some ground coffee in water,

thus achieving a convincing illusion through the fluctuating coffee.

We superimposed the two shots, and there you have the scene in the film.

Argento also insists on the very highest quality of his films' sound effects.

Nice one.

- Good. - Okay.

Give me another nice slash.

Try now.

- All ready? - Yes.

Louden

- All right, that's it. - Again?

- Yeah, carry on. - All right.

- All good. - Okay.

- Hit it hard. - Okay.

- Harder. - Yes.

Good one.

Beautiful.

- Hit the fleshier bit. - Hold on. Ready.

Easy, be careful.

You crazy?!

Argentds personal touch with music often goes along with sound effects.

Music has always been an important element in film.

Even during the silent era,

artists like Chaplin had special sheets of music

that would have been played in theaters to accompany the films.

With the advent of sound, music retained its importance.

Personally, I think it reached its zenith with some American musicals,

and in general during the last twenty years.

Music in films can be used in many different ways.

A score can be composed well before a film is finished,

but the two processes can also be complementary.

Other times, it can be composed once shooting has wrapped,

with the director handing the film off to the composer to score it.

The end result is different either way,

just as the impact of music on a film is always different.

If the score is composed before the film,

then the music basically oversees the impact the images will have on the screen,

as if it's become the main element of the whole film.

Most of the time, the music is composed before the actual film is born.

When the music is composed during the filming process,

well, in this case, music goes hand in hand with the images,

which are born with a sort of, let's say, musicality.

Musicality influences images.

The final result can be rather interesting.

When the score is created after the film,

the composer is basically making something to accompany the picture,

or to underline the emotional impact of some sequences.

In this case, music becomes the final touch to an already existing picture.

Again, all three options are different from each other.

Personally, I've always chosen to follow the first two.

My films' music has been composed either before or during the filming process.

The score of SUSPIRIA was created before the film,

during a trip I made to Greece.

I fell in love with the bouzouki, a traditional Greek musical instrument.

I loved its deep, metallic sound, so I bought one to bring back to Rome.

I think it also inspired me to create some of the film's most important sequences.

Argento always places great importance on the sound of his films.

Music has a key role in most of his films.

The score I did for TWO EVIL EYES played a lesser role, as the film was so fast-paced.

THE SECT makes more use of its music,

and it's actually more reminiscent of the way Argento used Goblin's music.

Dario Argento is not just a director.

He also works as a producer.

In this role, he often produces films helmed by other directors.

For instance, George Romero's DAWN OF THE DEAD,

Lamberto Bava's DEMONS and DEMONS 2,

and Michele Soavfs THE CHURCH and THE SECT.

But does a difference exist between the films he directs and the ones he produces?

I reckon there's a substantial difference between

the films I produce and write and the ones I produce and also direct.

The first obvious difference is that, concerning the ones I direct,

I'm personally involved in every phase of the process.

The ones I just produce have the more personal style

and touch of the different people directing them.

The soul of these films belong to those who directed them.

I'm talking about the likes of Lamberto Bava with DEMONS,

Michele Soavi with THE SECT and THE CHURCH, or George Romero with DAWN OF THE DEAD.