Back in 1996, Ludovic Houplain co-founded a graphics and animation studio called H5. Focusing primarily on music videos and luxury advertising, the Parisian creative collective has grown rappidly in recent years, branching out into the world of short filmmaking. H5′s first short, Logorama, received international recognition last weekend, when it was awarded the Oscar for Best Animated Short Film. LWLies caught up with Houplain to talk about the success of his co-helmed collective.
LWLies: Where did the idea for Logorama come from?
Houplain: The genesis of the concept first arose when Antoine Bardou-Jacquet and I collaborated on a video for Alex Gopher called The Child that was based on the idea of creating New York City completely out of logos. After that we were put forward for a music video for Télépopmusic. We realized that we could apply a similar principle but develop the concept further. Our world can be represented with logos. They can symbolize everything: characters, animals, vehicles, plants, graphic shapes… We scripted a concept about a culture clash between the East and the West using logos as the language and tools of that conflict. An opposition of logos, identities, politics, colours between these two super powers. This time, though, the project never took off. Later we were asked to make a video for George Harrison and reworked the core idea of a city made of logos, brand mascots and instantly recognizable corporate identities. The story was about the destruction of the city – cyclones, floods and torrential rain stripping these logos from the environment and carrying them away as a sort of cleansing, a new beginning. Then, sadly, George passed away and the idea disappeared with him. That is when I realised we would never sell the idea; H5 had to produce the film directly ourselves. I then looked with Nicolas Rozier for producers who would have the guts to produce such a film, without any censorship. We met some short film producers, including Nicolas Schmerkin (Autour de Minuit Production). With him, we managed to bring together a few financial partners (Mikros Images, Addict Film), to be able to make this film.
And when did the film go into production?
We started the production in 2006. We succeeded in putting together a production team who agreed on the signification, meaning not censoring ourselves in terms of the brands we chose or the icons and logos we were going to use. We had to take the idea to its logical conclusion without fear of the possible reaction. From there the project became about creating a real picture of modern and contemporary society through two of its most powerful visual elements: logos and visual medias. The film is based on the same concept as Pop Art.
Can you talk a little about the animation process? What was involved exactly?
Firstly, we took the illustrated storyboards and converted them into an animatic. From there, with our editor Sam Danesi, we refined the sequences using camera movement references taken from blockbuster action films. That allowed us to define the dynamics of each scene more tightly. When there was a particular camera pass or movement that we couldn’t find we actually shot mood and reference footage ourselves using a Sony 3CCD camera – for instance some of the scenes with the Pringles in the restaurant. Once that first pass was complete we gave the footage to the 3D team at Mikros Images to use as a basic animation for rotoscoping. At the same time they had some people working on modelling the logos we had selected for the main characters in 3D. The first footage we created was without dialogue so there was a separate process to refine the facial animation, focusing on lip movements and so on, once we’d finished recording the vocal performances.
The film is full of cultural references, how do you expect them to be interpreted?
I think this is something that will largely be dependent on the particular cultural references of the viewer and the country they live in, whether America or France or Switzerland for instance. The same logo can mean different things to different people depending on their contextual associations. I think a good example of that is the fact that Ronald McDonald is depicted carrying the gun used by the RAF (Red Army Fraction/Baader Meinhof), and that obviously won’t have the same meaning or evocative power for someone who isn’t German. On top of those associations there are the ones we can’t predict, and those will only emerge as the film continues to receive a wide audience who have their own personal response to it.
Do you see the film as more of a condemnation or a pastiche of our consumer culture?
Having come up against so many barriers along the way we decided to develop the concept into a short film because it was the only way to avoid censorship. As our lawyers told us, it was a mistake, and they all tried to prevent us from doing it. That only made us want to develop the concept even more. And whether it was Hervé or I, and then the co-producers, everybody got behind the film and pushed us to remain true to the idea. So, in answer to your question, the film is not merely a critique of brands or an anti-capitalist statement, it also highlights the importance of fighting for complete freedom in the creative process. In the modern world, where everything adheres to rules, and obeys laws about intellectual property, let’s at least keep this freedom, the freedom of speech, that should be above all the laws. It should be one of the Human Rights. How can a brand hypothetically forbid or attack this film? I think it would be crazy. So, yes, in that respect, the film is subversive. To be honest, I do find it strange that this kind of film hasn’t been made before though. However, and this is really important, the film is also a tribute to the logos, but not to brands.
Considering that Hollywood is built on a capitalist model, what do you make of the irony of the film receiving recognition for the Academy?
There is a certain irony, but it shows above all that they had to assess themselves with a sense of humour. Perhaps also because they are immersed in this world of brands longer than us they’re in a better position to really enjoy the self-referential game playing that’s part of the film’s objective.
What do you hope people will take away from the film?
We played with brands, identities, and created a world that speaks of our time. Above and beyond anything else we want people to enjoy the film. I think we’ve managed to do something that a lot of people would have liked to by taking these brands into a huge visual playground and then breaking the down and rebuilding them to create something new out of the chaos. In a way it feels like we’ve used logos like Lego.
What is the ongoing objective of H5?
We want to continue to experiment. We have another short film set in Russia and the Arctic Circle that’s in progress. Visually it’s very different from Logorama in the sense that the aesthetic is very clean. On top of that we’re developing exhibitions with museums and working on new material with other people, musicians, designers and so on. I think it’s really important that H5 doesn’t get locked into a system. Over the last 10 years we’ve gone from movie clips, to music promos, advertising projects and now short films. Now we want to move on to experiment with other media and explore different historical periods. It’s about being playful with what we create and maintaining a rigorous focus on developing strong ideas.
What inspires you as a creative collective?
Showing romanisation. You have to fight the ease of falling into a kind of habit, and try to talk to people with the languages and technologies of our time. This is not to be modern, but to be contemporary. To avoid traditionalism. At the same time it’s really important for us to retain independence because that’s when we create the most effective and stimulating work for our clients – whether they’re luxury brands or musical artists. Alongside those sorts of projects we’re working on our own concepts and that can take a lot of time and energy when you’re trying to push ideas that go beyond the current understanding of production processes or protocols. Logorama was a good example of that, I think. The hardest thing is not to have the idea, but to pull it off and take it to where it needs to go. I think that’s what motivates people at H5. Different projects with different combinations of people. It takes passion and desire.
Logorama was directed by H5 (François Alaux, Hervé de Crécy and Ludovic Houplain). Houplain/H5 is repped internationally (excluding France) by Stink.
