Jon Spira Takes Lazy Filmmaking To The Next Level

A response to a defamatory, hysterical and unprofessional piece of writing on Collider.com

Yesterday, Collider.com published Maggie Boccella’s review of the new documentary The Life and Deaths of Christopher Lee. I’m the director of this film and, having been surprised to see myself credited as ‘taking lazy filmmaking to the next level’ felt that I should respond to that allegation and some of the other commentary  that Maggie Boccella has indulged in about the film within the review and on social media.

Firstly, I want to say that I am fine with the review. I respect Maggie’s opinions on the film and I defend her right to express them. Everyone is entitled to hold and state their opinions.

I’m responding because the review makes some factually inaccurate, recklessly exaggerated inferences and baseless defamatory statements. I take issue with three main points surrounding the published piece:

1. The suggestion in the title and content of the piece that AI is used to a degree that it might ‘ruin’ the film

2. The sub-heading “JON SPIRA TAKES LAZY FILMMAKING TO THE NEXT LEVEL WITH AI”

3. Maggie’s post on X or Twitter which promotes the review with the statement “Huge fucking pro-tip; don’t use AI for b-roll in your movie or I won’t bother to finish it”

So, to address the use of AI in the film, you need to know several things;

• The film’s running time is 102 minutes. Of that, only 1 minute and 52 seconds of footage features AI in any capacity whatsoever.

• There are 18 separate animated sequences in the film which use a variety of animation techniques including stop-motion, cel animation, computer animation, motion graphics and whatever dark magic Dave McKean has been conjuring up over the last quarter-century for his mixed-media genius.

• Of these 18 sequences, only 4 use AI technology at all and only one of them is produced purely in AI and that is a single 8 second shot. The other three use AI as a tool in producing bespoke sequences which feature archive photography, stock footage and footage the animators went out and filmed specifically for the sequences.

• For this film, we hired 5 independent animators and 1 motion graphics artist who brought to life the work of 6 separate illustrators that we commissioned to produce original work.

The way that Maggie frames the use of AI in the film suggests that I - as the director - have created AI sequences to compensate for a lack of b-roll. She implies that I have some kind of magic software akin to AI Image Generator into which I just type a sentence and the software outputs a finished animation. That would, indeed, have been lazy.

The truth of the matter, however, is that - along with my producer - I hired a team of animators some very established and award-winning, such as Dave McKean and Astrid Goldsmith and some fresh out of art school whose showreels deeply impressed me. I spent a long time looking at animation showreels and the animators I felt were best suited to the project were given very simple briefs. I gave the animators the VoiceOver track and timings for their sections and after a quick discussion about their ideas, I gave them the latitude to produce the work however they saw fit. The two who chose to use AI in producing their segments did so in a way that supported their unique visions and styles and I stand by the final results as high quality, authored pieced of animation by distinct artists.

That Maggie refers to any of these sequences - she is not specific about which ones she is talking about - as ‘offensive AI slop’ is, in itself offensive to the artists who produced it and I suspect most viewers would disagree with her.

Maggie goes on to refer to ‘the blatant laziness that A.I. automatically signifies’ and then describes A.I. as ‘barbaric technology’

AI is a tool. In the hands of an artist, it can be used to produce art.

I understand, and largely agree with the concerns in our industry and others surrounding the rise of AI. It will very likely lead to a lot of people losing their jobs. It is likely to affect everyone from editors to screenwriters and - yes, animators and visual artists face a sobering prospect. But a tool is a tool.  It’s the executives who choose to use AI to slash budgets and the filmmakers who use it to cut corners who are the bad guys in this story.

Maggie paints me to be one of these people. And she’s wrong. I’m the very opposite - I hired 12 independent artists and gave them a good deal of creative freedom and latitude for artistic expression and at no point discussed the tools they would use to realise their work.

As an indie filmmaker, dealing with increasingly low budgets, it would be very easy to baton down the hatches and make cheap decisions. But, along with my producer Hank, I don’t do that. On this film, we hired animators, illustrators, model makers, puppeteers, composers and musicians.

I am upset by the sub-heading that calls me a lazy filmmaker and am angry at the hyperbolic notion that I take lazy filmmaking to the ‘next level’ - supported by my team of very talented film practitioners, I’ve built a career making unique, distinct documentaries which are crafted earnestly, with care, thought, fun, a lot of hard work and with great passion.

It’s an irony not wasted on me that Maggie managed to miss the central theme of this film - one which other reviewers picked up on immediately. The film is about empathy and compassion and the notion that even the most confident-seeming artists are riddled with insecurities and sensitivity about how their work might be misinterpreted.

But then, according to her post on X, she didn’t bother to finish watching it anyway. Which, to me, takes lazy film criticism to the next level.

Pre-order the Blu Ray and Limited Edition Wooden Coffin Box Set here: https://the-life-and-deaths-of-christopher-lee.pledgebox.com/preorder

Watch the Trailer here: