From Frankenstein to Marty Supreme, have film's prosthetic transformations become the key to winning Oscars?
Prosthetics once obscured actors. Now, as the craft reaches new heights, they’ve become a badge of commitment – and awards bodies are finally noticing…
Add Frankenstein and Marty Supreme to your watchlist Prosthetics were once a novelty; now they’re a hallmark of a prestige project. Take Jacob Elordi in Frankenstein: 10 hours in the makeup chair, he emerged not just as a monster – but as an Oscar nominee. Even on the small screen, actors are vanishing entirely: Bill Skarsgård as Pennywise in IT: Welcome to Derry, Jamie Campbell Bower as the veiny, villainous Vecna in Stranger Things, and Walton Goggins once again proving why he earned an Emmy nomination for Fallout as the mutated Ghoul. Between them, not an inch of their own skin is on show. With accolades and acclaim piling up, is this proof that prosthetic-clad performances are finally getting the recognition they deserve? Mike Hill brought Elordi’s Frankenstein Creature to life in all its blue-hued, monstrous glory, having previously collaborated with Guillermo del Toro on 2017’s The Shape of Water. That earlier work – creating the film’s “Amphibian Man” – didn’t earn him an Oscar nod. Frankenstein did. So how has the perception of his craft evolved over the past decade, and how does Hill ensure that the more he obscures a star, the more their performance comes into focus? “Many years ago,” says Hill, “I learned from an interview with makeup artist Dick Smith [of The Exorcist and The Godfather] that you should sculpt your prosthetic appliance the way you like it, then scrape away as much as possible – so the piece moves with the actor, but doesn’t stiffen the face.” For Elordi, Hill made the prosthetic pieces as fine as possible to ensure the actor’s expressions could still shine through. “As far as why it’s getting so much acclaim,” he adds, “I think that’s literally the performance. Jacob really sold the character. He really used the makeup, but it was his acting that made the character so memorable.” Shane Zander, who has been transforming Bill Skarsgård into demonic clown Pennywise for almost a decade, also praises the actor behind his prosthetics. “Bill’s a trooper when we apply the makeup,” says Zander of the six-hour process, “and he really uses his facial features to bring the character to life." Skarsgård’s patience isn’t surprising – he endured similarly long shifts to become Nosferatu’s cadaverous Count Orlok. Sometimes, Zander says, he’ll be asked to eke out “more performance” from an actor, which might mean stripping down the prosthetics. “We’ll design pieces to achieve this, but actors still usually have to overcompensate with their facial movements.” The thinner the appliance, then, the bigger the performance. And while prosthetics have long been regarded as technical wizardry – impressive, transformative, but somewhat restrictive to performance – they’re now key to setting modern horror’s high bar. On Stranger Things, Barrie Gower and four additional makeup artists spent seven hours each day applying 25 prosthetic pieces to Campbell Bower. The team carried out a series of “prosthetic pit stops," moving the actor from a seated position to standing, then to a massage table and finally a bar stool to attach each piece with precision. Vecna’s transformation presented the same rare challenge as Frankenstein's Creature – demanding not only full-body prosthetic coverage, but also the flexibility and nuance necessary to preserve the actor’s performance. “We’ve created some fantasy characters that are driven more by aesthetic shapes and forms rather than by the desire for the performer to emote through the prosthetics,” Zander explains, “especially if that character doesn’t have any dialogue." For leading actors, however, the performance must almost always register through layers of medical-grade silicone – the material most commonly used for prosthetic appliances, alongside gelatine and foam latex. “All of which are very malleable on the skin,” says Gower. “The brief usually requires the actor to be able to perform unrestricted, but also be unrecognisable, so our makeups range from very subtle, thin transfer appliances like eye-bags, nasolabial folds [smile lines], noses and chins, to reasonably thick full-body pieces.” It’s intricate work. And as the marathon makeup sessions of Elordi and Campbell Bower make clear, these transformations are feats of endurance. In Hill’s recent BAFTA acceptance speech, he praised the “incredibly patient” Elordi. “Mate, we couldn’t have done it without you,” he added. But for actors, such ordeals have increasingly become a passport to the top tier of awards recognition. Long hours in the makeup chair are the new extreme weight loss or method-style commitment to character – strategies that Debra Birnbaum of awards season forecaster Gold Derby says “have traditionally always impressed voters”. “Consider Daniel Day-Lewis in My Left Foot, or Robert De Niro in Raging Bull,” says Birnbaum. “Voters have always looked for commitment to a role – and pushing yourself physically to extremes can be a way to stand out in a competitive field. But it’s no longer a guarantee of a nomination, and it’s not a shortcut. You also have to have acting chops, and a performance that stands out behind the makeup." To completely hide yourself, then, is to put your acting skills to the ultimate test. Elordi has passed with flying colours – but there are plenty of other, more subtle prosthetics in the major acting categories this year. Amy Madigan’s work in Weapons, for example, saw her don a false nose, drooping earlobes and a single, beady contact lens. Originally, her character was to wear two lenses, but director Zach Cregger liked the off-putting asymmetry. Frankenstein had a similar story: Elordi complained that his second lens was uncomfortable, so he performed without it. These lenses are just one piece of the prosthetic puzzle – and increasingly, it’s these hyper-specialised details that allow actors to disappear completely. Cristina Patterson, of Eye Ink FX, is the lens painter who created Elordi’s Frankenstein contacts – but her work on Sinners has also been widely nominated this year. “For five years, I had been working on what I call ‘colour-shifting lenses,’ which cover the eye in iridescence and go from glowy blue to purple,” she says. “They require a completely different process from hand-painting. It takes over a month to make these lenses.” When the makeup designers on Sinners approached Patterson, they told her they were creating “a very different type of vampire film”. The experimental lenses seemed perfect. The only issue? “Because the pupil is completely covered, everyone was a little blind,” she says. Once again, the burden fell on the performer. In this case, Oscar nominee Michael B Jordan embraced the challenge. “He was especially excited to get the lenses in,” Patterson recalls. “Incredibly gracious, extremely professional – a pleasure to deal with.” Such discomfort is rarely visible on screen. But that’s the point. Like ultra-thin facial appliances, prosthetic lenses and dental work are designed not to distract from performance, but to deepen it. Sinners also required custom teeth – another niche within the wider prosthetics field. Chris Lyons, of Fangs FX, has spent more than four decades designing teeth for film and television. “We only use proper medical-grade, dental materials,” says Lyons of his pieces, which pop in and out like a gum shield – secure enough for performance, but convincing enough for close-ups. Lyons has fitted everyone from Skarsgård’s Nosferatu to scores of on-screen undead, whether in 28 Years Later or The Last of Us. But even the smallest dental detail can alter a performance: the way an actor speaks, breathes, even holds their jaw. “We’ve done teeth on films where the actor hasn’t even told the director that he’s wearing teeth,” says Lyons. “Some of them love it, because it actually makes them work harder. Unlike some of Lyons’s undead designs, Elordi’s reanimated Creature has only faintly discoloured teeth and receding gums – perhaps less monstrous than audiences might expect. And yet that restraint – the refusal to overwhelm the actor – is precisely what makes Elordi’s presence and performance awards-worthy. That’s not to say his appearance hasn’t had its detractors. A BBC article deemed his Creature too attractive – “a catwalk-ready hunk.” But that hardly seems fair. After all, many of this awards season’s more nuanced prosthetics have also taken handsome stars and stripped away their good looks – all while retaining their humanity. Hill cites Sean Penn’s half-disfigured (and Oscar-nominated) face from One Battle After Another, designed by Arjen Tuiten, as his favourite prosthetic piece of the year. “Consider, too, Timothée Chalamet in Marty Supreme,” adds Birnbaum. “Director Josh Safdie went to great lengths to hide his matinée idol looks behind pockmarked skin and Coke bottle glasses. Or Colin Farrell in The Penguin, who was unrecognisable and went on to sweep TV awards for his performance. “Being willing to be unattractive certainly helps an actor disappear into a role,” Birnbaum adds. “Remember the debate over Nicole Kidman’s prosthetic nose in The Hours? Sacrificing vanity for the sake of art lends authenticity to a performance, and that’s what voters are looking for." Lose your looks, then, and you might just earn a gong. There’s been a noticeable uptick in award nominations for such “uglification”: Demi Moore in The Substance, Brendan Fraser in The Whale – even Jessica Chastain in The Eyes of Tammy Faye, whose prosthetic applications, she claims, caused permanent skin damage (but also won her an Oscar). Since 2017, when he first created Pennywise for It, Zander believes prosthetic-clad performances have come to command greater respect. While many of his contemporaries rightly praise the actors beneath the applications, Zander is equally keen to celebrate the skill and artistry of prosthetic designers and technicians. “Prosthetic-heavy shows and even horror shows are being considered more these last few years,” he says of awards season representation. “And I don’t think it’s because prosthetics are becoming less restrictive, but possibly that they’re becoming more convincing, what with the advances in fabrication and application.” Gower agrees. Since An American Werewolf in London won the first-ever Academy Award for Best Makeup in 1982, he says that prosthetics have become increasingly prevalent in awards season acting categories. “The most extensive, transformative makeups are those that catch the audiences’ eye,” he adds, “especially those that radically change the appearance of a well-known actor, such as Gary Oldman as Winston Churchill.” Oldman’s Churchill, in Darkest Hour, won the actor his first Oscar in 2018. His comprehensive prosthetics were designed by Kazu Hiro, who has since carved out a niche recreating real-life people using makeup – and is once again Oscar-nominated this year for his work on The Smashing Machine, for which he turned Dwayne Johnson into MMA fighter Mark Kerr (Johnson’s performance, snubbed at the Oscars, was nominated for a Golden Globe). Hiro previously won an Oscar for his work on Bombshell, and was recently nominated for turning Bradley Cooper into Leonard Bernstein for Maestro. Maestro lost out to Poor Things, which featured Willem Dafoe as the deformed mad scientist Godwin Baxter – another of the many Oscar-recognised, prosthetic-driven performances in recent years. “As prosthetics have become more advanced,” says Birnbaum, “the ability to morph and adapt actors’ faces in ways both subtle and extensive has expanded the range of possibilities. And while filmmakers have a range of CGI tools available, it’s always more appealing to use realistic performances. Audiences have got savvier, as have voters.” Even Hill’s plaudits for Frankenstein, which have focused largely on his work with Elordi, tend to overlook his transformation of Mia Goth into Baroness Claire Frankenstein, her semi-secret second role of the film. It’s less showy work, he says, “but the steps and techniques are the same”. “And, in many ways, it was more exacting,” he adds, “because the audience knows that the Creature isn’t real. Claire had to fool the audience. They had to think she was a real person, but not Mia Goth. Ninety percent of the audience didn’t realise, and that was very rewarding. Audiences like to see the actor beneath the makeup, but they also like to be fooled.” True-to-life prosthetics, Gower also says, are trickier. “Likeness, character or ageing makeup is really difficult to pull off convincingly,” he explains. “Subtle, isolated pieces in the centre of an actor’s face are especially hard to disguise, and there’s a real art to it. You need to understand anatomy, and how the muscles in the face move.” Gower also cites The Smashing Machine as one of the most technically skilful designs of this awards season – “It’s subtle, a great example of prosthetics” – as well as the “breakdown of [Chalamet’s] skin” in Marty Supreme. “There are some beautiful makeups this season,” he says. There’s a certain irony in that. As, for all the prestige and accolades, the majority of modern movie prosthetics still seem to have one primary aim: to shock and disturb. And there’s more of that to come. While creating fungus-ravaged zombies for The Last of Us, which will film its third series this year, Gower and his team grew mushrooms and 3D-scanned them to replicate their textures in silicone. It’s just one of many technological leaps the field has made since the turn of the millennium. “We no longer ‘life-cast’, either,” he says, “which is the traditional process of using alginate and plaster bandage to create a mould of an actor’s head, which was quite a claustrophobic experience. We now 3D scan all our actors, a quick and accurate process, and use silicone, which gives us the ability to create incredibly realistic skin, thanks to its translucent qualities. Its flexibility and movement are also very lifelike, and we can pigment pieces to match actors’ skin tones perfectly.” Such advancements may eventually trickle down to biopics and subtler appliances, but they almost always begin when a horror problem needs solving. As a genre, it’s the engine of invention – this year, it’s Frankenstein. But, before we see next awards season, Robert Eggers’s Werwulf will transform Aaron Taylor-Johnson, prosthetically and practically, into a wolfman. The Mike Flanagan-scripted Clayface will turn Tom Rhys Harries into a muddy, monstrous antihero. And another Skarsgård – Alexander – will be encased in prosthetic reeds for the unsettling Wicker. It’s the same as it’s ever been, then – since An American Werewolf in London scooped that first makeup Oscar almost half a century ago. Only now, thanks to the artistry of the people behind the prosthetics, the actors brave enough to disappear beneath them are finally getting their due.
Prosthetics were once a novelty; now they’re a hallmark of a prestige project. Take Jacob Elordi in Frankenstein: 10 hours in the makeup chair, he emerged not just as a monster – but as an Oscar nominee. Even on the small screen, actors are vanishing entirely: Bill Skarsgård as Pennywise in IT: Welcome to Derry, Jamie Campbell Bower as the veiny, villainous Vecna in Stranger Things, and Walton Goggins once again proving why he earned an Emmy nomination for Fallout as the mutated Ghoul. Between them, not an inch of their own skin is on show. With accolades and acclaim piling up, is this proof that prosthetic-clad performances are finally getting the recognition they deserve? Mike Hill brought Elordi’s Frankenstein Creature to life in all its blue-hued, monstrous glory, having previously collaborated with Guillermo del Toro on 2017’s The Shape of Water. That earlier work – creating the film’s “Amphibian Man” – didn’t earn him an Oscar nod. Frankenstein did. So how has the perception of his craft evolved over the past decade, and how does Hill ensure that the more he obscures a star, the more their performance comes into focus? “Many years ago,” says Hill, “I learned from an interview with makeup artist Dick Smith [of The Exorcist and The Godfather] that you should sculpt your prosthetic appliance the way you like it, then scrape away as much as possible – so the piece moves with the actor, but doesn’t stiffen the face.” For Elordi, Hill made the prosthetic pieces as fine as possible to ensure the actor’s expressions could still shine through. “As far as why it’s getting so much acclaim,” he adds, “I think that’s literally the performance. Jacob really sold the character. He really used the makeup, but it was his acting that made the character so memorable.” Shane Zander, who has been transforming Bill Skarsgård into demonic clown Pennywise for almost a decade, also praises the actor behind his prosthetics. “Bill’s a trooper when we apply the makeup,” says Zander of the six-hour process, “and he really uses his facial features to bring the character to life." Skarsgård’s patience isn’t surprising – he endured similarly long shifts to become Nosferatu’s cadaverous Count Orlok. Sometimes, Zander says, he’ll be asked to eke out “more performance” from an actor, which might mean stripping down the prosthetics. “We’ll design pieces to achieve this, but actors still usually have to overcompensate with their facial movements.” The thinner the appliance, then, the bigger the performance. And while prosthetics have long been regarded as technical wizardry – impressive, transformative, but somewhat restrictive to performance – they’re now key to setting modern horror’s high bar. On Stranger Things, Barrie Gower and four additional makeup artists spent seven hours each day applying 25 prosthetic pieces to Campbell Bower. The team carried out a series of “prosthetic pit stops," moving the actor from a seated position to standing, then to a massage table and finally a bar stool to attach each piece with precision. Vecna’s transformation presented the same rare challenge as Frankenstein's Creature – demanding not only full-body prosthetic coverage, but also the flexibility and nuance necessary to preserve the actor’s performance. “We’ve created some fantasy characters that are driven more by aesthetic shapes and forms rather than by the desire for the performer to emote through the prosthetics,” Zander explains, “especially if that character doesn’t have any dialogue." For leading actors, however, the performance must almost always register through layers of medical-grade silicone – the material most commonly used for prosthetic appliances, alongside gelatine and foam latex. “All of which are very malleable on the skin,” says Gower. “The brief usually requires the actor to be able to perform unrestricted, but also be unrecognisable, so our makeups range from very subtle, thin transfer appliances like eye-bags, nasolabial folds [smile lines], noses and chins, to reasonably thick full-body pieces.” It’s intricate work. And as the marathon makeup sessions of Elordi and Campbell Bower make clear, these transformations are feats of endurance. In Hill’s recent BAFTA acceptance speech, he praised the “incredibly patient” Elordi. “Mate, we couldn’t have done it without you,” he added. But for actors, such ordeals have increasingly become a passport to the top tier of awards recognition. Long hours in the makeup chair are the new extreme weight loss or method-style commitment to character – strategies that Debra Birnbaum of awards season forecaster Gold Derby says “have traditionally always impressed voters”. “Consider Daniel Day-Lewis in My Left Foot, or Robert De Niro in Raging Bull,” says Birnbaum. “Voters have always looked for commitment to a role – and pushing yourself physically to extremes can be a way to stand out in a competitive field. But it’s no longer a guarantee of a nomination, and it’s not a shortcut. You also have to have acting chops, and a performance that stands out behind the makeup." To completely hide yourself, then, is to put your acting skills to the ultimate test. Elordi has passed with flying colours – but there are plenty of other, more subtle prosthetics in the major acting categories this year. Amy Madigan’s work in Weapons, for example, saw her don a false nose, drooping earlobes and a single, beady contact lens. Originally, her character was to wear two lenses, but director Zach Cregger liked the off-putting asymmetry. Frankenstein had a similar story: Elordi complained that his second lens was uncomfortable, so he performed without it. These lenses are just one piece of the prosthetic puzzle – and increasingly, it’s these hyper-specialised details that allow actors to disappear completely. Cristina Patterson, of Eye Ink FX, is the lens painter who created Elordi’s Frankenstein contacts – but her work on Sinners has also been widely nominated this year. “For five years, I had been working on what I call ‘colour-shifting lenses,’ which cover the eye in iridescence and go from glowy blue to purple,” she says. “They require a completely different process from hand-painting. It takes over a month to make these lenses.” When the makeup designers on Sinners approached Patterson, they told her they were creating “a very different type of vampire film”. The experimental lenses seemed perfect. The only issue? “Because the pupil is completely covered, everyone was a little blind,” she says. Once again, the burden fell on the performer. In this case, Oscar nominee Michael B Jordan embraced the challenge. “He was especially excited to get the lenses in,” Patterson recalls. “Incredibly gracious, extremely professional – a pleasure to deal with.” Such discomfort is rarely visible on screen. But that’s the point. Like ultra-thin facial appliances, prosthetic lenses and dental work are designed not to distract from performance, but to deepen it. Sinners also required custom teeth – another niche within the wider prosthetics field. Chris Lyons, of Fangs FX, has spent more than four decades designing teeth for film and television. “We only use proper medical-grade, dental materials,” says Lyons of his pieces, which pop in and out like a gum shield – secure enough for performance, but convincing enough for close-ups. Lyons has fitted everyone from Skarsgård’s Nosferatu to scores of on-screen undead, whether in 28 Years Later or The Last of Us. But even the smallest dental detail can alter a performance: the way an actor speaks, breathes, even holds their jaw. “We’ve done teeth on films where the actor hasn’t even told the director that he’s wearing teeth,” says Lyons. “Some of them love it, because it actually makes them work harder. Unlike some of Lyons’s undead designs, Elordi’s reanimated Creature has only faintly discoloured teeth and receding gums – perhaps less monstrous than audiences might expect. And yet that restraint – the refusal to overwhelm the actor – is precisely what makes Elordi’s presence and performance awards-worthy. That’s not to say his appearance hasn’t had its detractors. A BBC article deemed his Creature too attractive – “a catwalk-ready hunk.” But that hardly seems fair. After all, many of this awards season’s more nuanced prosthetics have also taken handsome stars and stripped away their good looks – all while retaining their humanity. Hill cites Sean Penn’s half-disfigured (and Oscar-nominated) face from One Battle After Another, designed by Arjen Tuiten, as his favourite prosthetic piece of the year. “Consider, too, Timothée Chalamet in Marty Supreme,” adds Birnbaum. “Director Josh Safdie went to great lengths to hide his matinée idol looks behind pockmarked skin and Coke bottle glasses. Or Colin Farrell in The Penguin, who was unrecognisable and went on to sweep TV awards for his performance. “Being willing to be unattractive certainly helps an actor disappear into a role,” Birnbaum adds. “Remember the debate over Nicole Kidman’s prosthetic nose in The Hours? Sacrificing vanity for the sake of art lends authenticity to a performance, and that’s what voters are looking for." Lose your looks, then, and you might just earn a gong. There’s been a noticeable uptick in award nominations for such “uglification”: Demi Moore in The Substance, Brendan Fraser in The Whale – even Jessica Chastain in The Eyes of Tammy Faye, whose prosthetic applications, she claims, caused permanent skin damage (but also won her an Oscar). Since 2017, when he first created Pennywise for It, Zander believes prosthetic-clad performances have come to command greater respect. While many of his contemporaries rightly praise the actors beneath the applications, Zander is equally keen to celebrate the skill and artistry of prosthetic designers and technicians. “Prosthetic-heavy shows and even horror shows are being considered more these last few years,” he says of awards season representation. “And I don’t think it’s because prosthetics are becoming less restrictive, but possibly that they’re becoming more convincing, what with the advances in fabrication and application.” Gower agrees. Since An American Werewolf in London won the first-ever Academy Award for Best Makeup in 1982, he says that prosthetics have become increasingly prevalent in awards season acting categories. “The most extensive, transformative makeups are those that catch the audiences’ eye,” he adds, “especially those that radically change the appearance of a well-known actor, such as Gary Oldman as Winston Churchill.” Oldman’s Churchill, in Darkest Hour, won the actor his first Oscar in 2018. His comprehensive prosthetics were designed by Kazu Hiro, who has since carved out a niche recreating real-life people using makeup – and is once again Oscar-nominated this year for his work on The Smashing Machine, for which he turned Dwayne Johnson into MMA fighter Mark Kerr (Johnson’s performance, snubbed at the Oscars, was nominated for a Golden Globe). Hiro previously won an Oscar for his work on Bombshell, and was recently nominated for turning Bradley Cooper into Leonard Bernstein for Maestro. Maestro lost out to Poor Things, which featured Willem Dafoe as the deformed mad scientist Godwin Baxter – another of the many Oscar-recognised, prosthetic-driven performances in recent years. “As prosthetics have become more advanced,” says Birnbaum, “the ability to morph and adapt actors’ faces in ways both subtle and extensive has expanded the range of possibilities. And while filmmakers have a range of CGI tools available, it’s always more appealing to use realistic performances. Audiences have got savvier, as have voters.” Even Hill’s plaudits for Frankenstein, which have focused largely on his work with Elordi, tend to overlook his transformation of Mia Goth into Baroness Claire Frankenstein, her semi-secret second role of the film. It’s less showy work, he says, “but the steps and techniques are the same”. “And, in many ways, it was more exacting,” he adds, “because the audience knows that the Creature isn’t real. Claire had to fool the audience. They had to think she was a real person, but not Mia Goth. Ninety percent of the audience didn’t realise, and that was very rewarding. Audiences like to see the actor beneath the makeup, but they also like to be fooled.” True-to-life prosthetics, Gower also says, are trickier. “Likeness, character or ageing makeup is really difficult to pull off convincingly,” he explains. “Subtle, isolated pieces in the centre of an actor’s face are especially hard to disguise, and there’s a real art to it. You need to understand anatomy, and how the muscles in the face move.” Gower also cites The Smashing Machine as one of the most technically skilful designs of this awards season – “It’s subtle, a great example of prosthetics” – as well as the “breakdown of [Chalamet’s] skin” in Marty Supreme. “There are some beautiful makeups this season,” he says. There’s a certain irony in that. As, for all the prestige and accolades, the majority of modern movie prosthetics still seem to have one primary aim: to shock and disturb. And there’s more of that to come. While creating fungus-ravaged zombies for The Last of Us, which will film its third series this year, Gower and his team grew mushrooms and 3D-scanned them to replicate their textures in silicone. It’s just one of many technological leaps the field has made since the turn of the millennium. “We no longer ‘life-cast’, either,” he says, “which is the traditional process of using alginate and plaster bandage to create a mould of an actor’s head, which was quite a claustrophobic experience. We now 3D scan all our actors, a quick and accurate process, and use silicone, which gives us the ability to create incredibly realistic skin, thanks to its translucent qualities. Its flexibility and movement are also very lifelike, and we can pigment pieces to match actors’ skin tones perfectly.” Such advancements may eventually trickle down to biopics and subtler appliances, but they almost always begin when a horror problem needs solving. As a genre, it’s the engine of invention – this year, it’s Frankenstein. But, before we see next awards season, Robert Eggers’s Werwulf will transform Aaron Taylor-Johnson, prosthetically and practically, into a wolfman. The Mike Flanagan-scripted Clayface will turn Tom Rhys Harries into a muddy, monstrous antihero. And another Skarsgård – Alexander – will be encased in prosthetic reeds for the unsettling Wicker. It’s the same as it’s ever been, then – since An American Werewolf in London scooped that first makeup Oscar almost half a century ago. Only now, thanks to the artistry of the people behind the prosthetics, the actors brave enough to disappear beneath them are finally getting their due. Check out more of our Film coverage or visit our TV Guide and Streaming Guide to find out what's on. For more TV recommendations and reviews, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.
The footballer turned actor on playing gangsters, the great outdoors and coping with loneliness and grief
Add Vinnie Jones in the Country to your watchlist After a headline-grabbing football career, Vinnie Jones burst onto the big screen in Guy Ritchie’s 1998 debut Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. Since then, he’s played soldiers, supervillains and enough gangsters to fill a crime family. But Vinnie Jones in the Country, now in its third series, follows the actor’s true passion: preserving and exploring the countryside from his 2,000-acre estate in West Sussex. Just don’t compare it to Clarkson’s Farm… When did your love of the outdoors begin? I caught my first trout with my dad when I was seven. He was always a passionate country man – we had fishing rods and guns and bred working dogs. We were in Watford, and I still remember finding my first lapwing nest in a field. If I were on Mastermind, my specialist subject would be British nature – not many people would beat me. You’ve moved from football to acting to country living — is it in your nature to reinvent yourself? I couldn’t just sit on my arse watching daytime TV. I get anxiety attacks if I don’t have plans for every day of the week. Doing all of this is where I’m in my element. For me, it’s 1988 every day: playing Liverpool in front of 100,000 people at Wembley. It’s like reliving my childhood, which was all countryside and football. Now it’s all countryside and acting. You had the idea for Vinnie Jones in the Country before Covid — did the pandemic change your approach to the show? I’d just lost my wife [Tanya died in 2019] going into the pandemic, so I couldn’t have been lonelier. I spent lockdown watching Netflix box sets. When we came out, the first thing I wanted was to dive into the countryside. It felt like being on the top board with the ladder taken away – I had no choice but to jump in. The show was the same: I dived straight in. How would you describe the show? It’s a show without an agenda, and it’s not a farm show – it’s an in-the-country show. Everyone’s tried to hang it on Clarkson’s Farm, which I find a bit upsetting. Jeremy’s done a fantastic job raising awareness for farmers, but ours is a different little show. After our second series, I think we were given a sponsored rake. Look at Clarkson’s Farm: tractors, combines – everything! Did you set out to explore grief and male friendship this series, or did that emerge naturally? It was never planned, but we’ve let the show take its own course, like a river: if it hits a dam, it goes another way. There’s a lot to be said for discussing mental health in the countryside, because it can be a lonely job. Are people surprised by your interest in nature and mental health? In the past, many newspapers were filled with stories about me being a lunatic, but a lot of that I brought on myself with the drinking. But I’m 12 years sober this April, and I wanted to show people what I actually do in my spare time. Yesterday, I sat for six hours just to see a kingfisher. I’m not a south- London gangster, never have been. After 15 years in the US, did you miss the British countryside? We moved there for my acting career and were up in Burbank, across the valley from Beverly Hills. I saw lots of wildlife – although mostly on golf courses! I’d also go up to Canada two or three times a year to fly fish and see the eagles. My favourite place on earth is just north of Vancouver. It’s a different world up there. What’s next for your partnership with film-maker Guy Ritchie? The new series of The Gentlemen, and I’m pretty heavy in this one. I may have another big movie with Guy this year, too. [Jones has just been confirmed as one of the leads in Ritchie’s new film Viva la Madness, based on the Layer Cake book series, alongside Jason Isaacs and Jonny Lee Miller]. There’s no time to stop swinging, but for me, and my mental health, that helps. In the show, you call your manor house “the new Yellowstone”. What else have you been watching on TV lately? We’ve watched Mobland and I’ll always watch Attenborough, he’s one of my heroes. I also like Grand Designs and The Chase. But other than football, we don’t watch a lot of telly. The countryside takes it out of you, so we’re often knackered and in bed before 9pm. We’ve got a little puppy too, so that also keeps us busy! Will there be more In the Country? We haven’t decided yet. I don’t want it to drag – three was our magic number. We’re building the lake house now and filming that, but do we want a construction series? When I played football, I wanted to finish at the top, not go back down through the leagues. We’ve had fun, but look at Clarkson’s Farm – there’s lots of politics there. I never want our little show to get like that. Ours is more of a hobby.
Vinnie Jones explains why Clarkson's Farm comparisons are "upsetting" as he returns with In the Country
The footballer turned actor on playing gangsters, the great outdoors and coping with loneliness and grief.
This article first appeared in Radio Times magazine. After a headline-grabbing football career, Vinnie Jones burst onto the big screen in Guy Ritchie’s 1998 debut Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. Since then, he’s played soldiers, supervillains and enough gangsters to fill a crime family. But Vinnie Jones in the Country, now in its third series, follows the actor’s true passion: preserving and exploring the countryside from his 2,000-acre estate in West Sussex. Just don’t compare it to Clarkson’s Farm… When did your love of the outdoors begin? I caught my first trout with my dad when I was seven. He was always a passionate country man – we had fishing rods and guns and bred working dogs. We were in Watford, and I still remember finding my first lapwing nest in a field. If I were on Mastermind, my specialist subject would be British nature – not many people would beat me. You’ve moved from football to acting to country living — is it in your nature to reinvent yourself? I couldn’t just sit on my arse watching daytime TV. I get anxiety attacks if I don’t have plans for every day of the week. Doing all of this is where I’m in my element. For me, it’s 1988 every day: playing Liverpool in front of 100,000 people at Wembley. It’s like reliving my childhood, which was all countryside and football. Now it’s all countryside and acting. You had the idea for Vinnie Jones in the Country before Covid — did the pandemic change your approach to the show? I’d just lost my wife [Tanya died in 2019] going into the pandemic, so I couldn’t have been lonelier. I spent lockdown watching Netflix box sets. When we came out, the first thing I wanted was to dive into the countryside. It felt like being on the top board with the ladder taken away – I had no choice but to jump in. The show was the same: I dived straight in. How would you describe the show? It’s a show without an agenda, and it’s not a farm show – it’s an in-the-country show. Everyone’s tried to hang it on Clarkson’s Farm, which I find a bit upsetting. Jeremy’s done a fantastic job raising awareness for farmers, but ours is a different little show. After our second series, I think we were given a sponsored rake. Look at Clarkson’s Farm: tractors, combines – everything! Did you set out to explore grief and male friendship this series, or did that emerge naturally? It was never planned, but we’ve let the show take its own course, like a river: if it hits a dam, it goes another way. There’s a lot to be said for discussing mental health in the countryside, because it can be a lonely job. Are people surprised by your interest in nature and mental health? In the past, many newspapers were filled with stories about me being a lunatic, but a lot of that I brought on myself with the drinking. But I’m 12 years sober this April, and I wanted to show people what I actually do in my spare time. Yesterday, I sat for six hours just to see a kingfisher. I’m not a south-London gangster, never have been. After 15 years in the US, did you miss the British countryside? We moved there for my acting career and were up in Burbank, across the valley from Beverly Hills. I saw lots of wildlife – although mostly on golf courses! I’d also go up to Canada two or three times a year to fly fish and see the eagles. My favourite place on earth is just north of Vancouver. It’s a different world up there. What’s next for your partnership with film-maker Guy Ritchie? The new series of The Gentlemen, and I’m pretty heavy in this one. I may have another big movie with Guy this year, too. [Jones has just been confirmed as one of the leads in Ritchie’s new film Viva la Madness, based on the Layer Cake book series, alongside Jason Isaacs and Jonny Lee Miller]. There’s no time to stop swinging, but for me, and my mental health, that helps. In the show, you call your manor house “the new Yellowstone”. What else have you been watching on TV lately? We’ve watched MobLand and I’ll always watch Attenborough, he’s one of my heroes. I also like Grand Designs and The Chase. But other than football, we don’t watch a lot of telly. The countryside takes it out of you, so we’re often knackered and in bed before 9pm. We’ve got a little puppy too, so that also keeps us busy! Will there be more In the Country? We haven’t decided yet. I don’t want it to drag – three was our magic number. We’re building the lake house now and filming that, but do we want a construction series? When I played football, I wanted to finish at the top, not go back down through the leagues. We’ve had fun, but look at Clarkson’s Farm – there’s lots of politics there. I never want our little show to get like that. Ours is more of a hobby. The latest issue of Radio Times is out now – subscribe here. Check out more of our Documentaries coverage or visit our TV Guide and Streaming Guide to find out what's on. For more TV recommendations and reviews, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.
Heart and humour are at the core of Saturday-night behemoth Michael McIntyre’s Big Show. Series producer James Pratt spills the beans on what it takes to bring the laughs to life
Add Michael McIntyre's Big Show to your watchlist Running a Big Show? That’s a big job. “Michael always jokes that we’ve got four shows in one,” says James Pratt, series producer on Michael McIntyre’s Big Show, “and any of our strands could be a show in its own right.” These strands are the building blocks of Big Show, which is back this week for a ninth series: theatre-based set pieces, a major musical performance, pre-recorded segments and the Unexpected Star of the Show slot, where people are tricked onto stage via a complicated prank to perform for the audience. “Heart and humour,” says Pratt. “That’s at the core of any idea. We never start with logistics or budget.” Few ideas are as reliably chaotic as Midnight Gameshow, with comedian/host McIntyre, in full quizmaster mode, showing up unannounced in a celebrity’s bedroom after dark. This series, Jonathan Ross is on the receiving end. “We approach their agents, who usually check with a spouse,” Pratt explains. “There have been some really interesting ones. Rob Rinder lived alone, so his housekeeper had to let us in.” Rugby star Joe Marler is also ambushed this series. “Michael said it’s the scariest one he’s ever done – he wore a scrum cap!” But everyone can get pranked – not just famous faces. Unexpected Star is a cornerstone of Big Show, which filmed last summer at the Theatre Royal Drury Lane on Sundays (setting up immediately after Saturday night’s Hercules the Musical curtain call). The scale of Unexpected Star – with its fake rooms and fall-away walls – is enormous. “Our art team is amazing,” says Pratt. “We find our person, work out the right environment to put them in, then design and build sets in a matter of weeks.” Past creations have included salons, police stations and hotels. “Our prank room is like a big Lego kit. We can resize rooms, re-dress walls or change corridor shapes.” This year also introduces a new segment, Big Surprise, which encompasses the show’s most ambitious stunts. Pratt’s highlight sees two young boys stunned at a WWE show in Manchester – but he’s always thinking bigger. “We’ve always loved the idea of doing something on a plane. Not easy, but not impossible…”
Michael McIntyre's Big Show set to feature the "scariest" Midnight Gameshow yet in new episodes
Heart and humour are at the core of Saturday-night behemoth Michael McIntyre’s Big Show. Series producer James Pratt spills the beans on what it takes to bring the laughs to life.
This article first appeared in Radio Times magazine. Running a Big Show? That’s a big job. “Michael always jokes that we’ve got four shows in one,” says James Pratt, series producer on Michael McIntyre’s Big Show, “and any of our strands could be a show in its own right.” These strands are the building blocks of Big Show, which is back this week for a ninth series: theatre-based set pieces, a major musical performance, pre-recorded segments and the Unexpected Star of the Show slot, where people are tricked onto stage via a complicated prank to perform for the audience. “Heart and humour,” says Pratt. “That’s at the core of any idea. We never start with logistics or budget.” Few ideas are as reliably chaotic as Midnight Gameshow, with comedian/host McIntyre, in full quizmaster mode, showing up unannounced in a celebrity’s bedroom after dark. This series, Jonathan Ross is on the receiving end. “We approach their agents, who usually check with a spouse,” Pratt explains. “There have been some really interesting ones. Rob Rinder lived alone, so his housekeeper had to let us in.” Rugby star Joe Marler is also ambushed this series. “Michael said it’s the scariest one he’s ever done – he wore a scrum cap!” But everyone can get pranked – not just famous faces. Unexpected Star is a cornerstone of Big Show, which filmed last summer at the Theatre Royal Drury Lane on Sundays (setting up immediately after Saturday night’s Hercules the Musical curtain call). The scale of Unexpected Star – with its fake rooms and fall-away walls – is enormous. “Our art team is amazing,” says Pratt. “We find our person, work out the right environment to put them in, then design and build sets in a matter of weeks.” Past creations have included salons, police stations and hotels. “Our prank room is like a big Lego kit. We can resize rooms, re-dress walls or change corridor shapes.” This year also introduces a new segment, Big Surprise, which encompasses the show’s most ambitious stunts. Pratt’s highlight sees two young boys stunned at a WWE show in Manchester – but he’s always thinking bigger. “We’ve always loved the idea of doing something on a plane. Not easy, but not impossible…” The latest issue of Radio Times is out now – subscribe here. Michael McIntyre's Big Show returns at 6:45pm on Saturday 17 January on BBC One and iPlayer. Check out more of our Entertainment coverage or visit our TV Guide and Streaming Guide to find out what's on. For more TV recommendations and reviews, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.
What it’s like to be Frankenstein, Willy Wonka and Paddington's florist
For Amanda Willgrave, business is blooming.
A shorter version of this article first appeared in Radio Times magazine. On-set florist Amanda Willgrave, who is based at London’s New Covent Garden Flower Market, has spent over two decades bringing her cinematic arrangements to screens both big and small, providing bunches and bouquets for films including Wonka, Wicked and two out of three Paddingtons. Next year, her work will appear in Emerald Fennell’s much-anticipated Wuthering Heights, but her latest project is Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein, streaming now on Netflix. Here, Willgrave tells RT why she doesn’t actually want you to notice her flowers. A BUDDING CAREER In the '90s, I worked my way up from receptionist to producer for a production company in Soho, but it was such an industry of excess that I soon decided I’d had enough – I wanted a change. I didn’t have a dream of being a florist, but my lovely then-boss got me a month-long career-change course at the Jane Packer Flower School as a leaving present. BLOSSOM FORTH I opened up a small flower shop in Kensal Rise in London, where quite a few set decorators lived. I made up some vases for a couple of films, and then one set decorator, Rebecca Alleway, asked me to help her dress a film called Imagine Me & You, set in a flower shop. Following that, I worked on Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason. In 2018, I did Cruella, which I’m hugely proud of, and there were lots of flowers in it, so things got much busier after that. COURSE OF ACTION On a film, I’ll talk to the set decorator, they’ll talk to the production designer, and they’ll talk to the director. That’s the line of contact. If it’s a film with a lot of flowers, the set decorator will bring me in early on. There’ll be a document that lists every set and the flower requirements for each one. After an initial conversation, I’ll put together mood boards, flower stems and work out how much it’s going to cost to do the arrangements. FRESH AS A DAISY We don’t really want you to notice the flowers – we just want them to be part of the set. If they need to be there for more than two days, we’ll start looking at fakes. There’s a real skill to making fakes look good. Some people think you just take them out of the box, but we often add real foliage, because that makes them look better. We try to use them only as background flowers. For close-ups, we use real flowers. MAKING ARRANGEMENTS There are certain fresh flowers that we won’t use on set. Tulips, for example, because when they’re under lights, they open, move and change, which is really bad for continuity. We don’t use a lot of fresh lilies either, mostly because of the pollen, but also because they open. PLAY SAFE I work very closely with the action prop buyer, who deals with handheld props. On Hamnet, for example, we worked on the herbs used for the lotions and potions in the film. If we’re providing flowers that will be placed on food, or even just held by an actor, we must be very aware that we’re not using poisonous plants, or ones that could trigger a skin allergy. HALF DEAD Sometimes, there’ll be two scenes, filmed on the same day, but set 10 days apart, by which time the flowers would need to look dead. In those situations, I’ve been known to stick flowers in the oven to age them, or go through the bins at the Flower Market, but usually we get enough notice and can buy the same flowers two weeks in advance to die them off naturally. ON THE SCENT A good scent can help an actor find their character. Sometimes we use fragrant, but not too heavily fragrant, flowers that the cast and crew will notice when they walk in. It might be jasmine, or maybe roses. We wouldn’t often use lilies, though, as people don’t tend to like the smell of them. IN THE MARKET The great thing about being based at New Covent Garden Flower Market is that I can talk to wholesalers, who have a wealth of knowledge. We did some work on Napoleon for Ridley Scott. In my research, I discovered that violets were Napoleon’s favourite flower – they had a significance throughout his life, so my wholesaler imported violets from Italy for me to make buttonholes. ROSE TO THE OCCASION If it’s a period film, I really do my research. I collect historical floristry books. For Frankenstein, I found a book from the Victorian period in which it’s set, published in the 1870s. The set decorator and I looked at how they made flower arrangements back then and the popular shapes. In the same way that clothes go through fashions, so do flowers. To suit the film, we used “Earl Grey” and “Ocean Song” roses, silver-grey mimosa foliage, “Lege Marron” carnations and “Hot Biscuits” amaranthus. THROW THE BOUQUET The wedding scene in Frankenstein was filmed at Gosford House in East Lothian, Scotland. When you’re dressing flowers in period properties, there are always restrictions and challenges. The hallway was Italian marble, so we had to use minimal water and avoid spillages that would stain the floor. We prepped everything in tents and would bring the arrangements and garlands into the properties ready-made. TEAM PLAYER Film floristry is a very different type of floristry. It’s not something that any florist could do, because you have to part with your ego – you’re not doing your flowers. You’re facilitating somebody else’s idea. In the end, you’re just there to service that. WASTE NOT Most films now have a sustainability person, who we’ll liaise with at the end of filming. Sometimes, the flowers will be put into green recycling, but, if they still have life in them, we’ll donate them to Floral Angels. They’re an amazing charity based at New Covent Garden Flower Market that repurposes flowers into smaller arrangements, which they donate to hospices and care homes. Frankenstein is available on Netflix now. Sign up for Netflix from £5.99 a month. Netflix is also available on Sky Glass and Virgin Media Stream. Check out more of our Film coverage or visit our TV Guide and Streaming Guide to find out what's on. For more from the biggest stars in TV, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.
What it's like to dress the sets of period dramas – from the expert behind Bridgerton, Hedda and more
From making curtains and flags to smothering pillows and papooses...
A shorter version of this article first appeared in Radio Times magazine. Jillian Drujon knows how it’s hanging. As a trusted supplier of curtains, tents, banners and bedclothes to some of Hollywood’s biggest productions, the American-born drapesmaster has worked on fantastical period dramas from Bridgerton to King Arthur. She’s gone sci-fi for Blade Runner and Men in Black. She even worked on the sail-flapping, flag-snapping Pirates of the Caribbean franchise. With business partner Paula Maestro, Draper Emporium is based in a studio in north-west London, where Drujon works to train the next generation of drapers. It’s also where she fabricates the weird and wonderful textiles that have featured in films from Maleficent to Mission: Impossible. Recently, she’s behind the textiles in Hedda, starring Tessa Thompson – a reimagining of Henrik Ibsen's play Hedda Gabler. Here Drujon tells RT why her role is about so much more than providing curtains for productions. LEARNING HOW TO STITCH I grew up in Massachusetts, started stitching at school, and had an industrial sewing machine in my bedroom by the age of 17. My mom played Scrabble competitively, and after I made her a Scrabble bag, I got a small contract making them. I moved to London at 19 and a draper I knew got me some work on Danny Boyle's Sunshine, making the interiors of the spaceship, and it went from there. Even people in the industry don’t know this job exists. Drapesmaster is a very antiquated term because you think curtains, but it’s not just that. It encapsulates loads of stuff, from flags to soft furnishings. I only really need a sewing machine, a pair of good scissors and a tape measure, and maybe a pen and a staple gun. WORKING WITH THE RIGHT MATERIALS I'm brought in by the set decorator, ideally eight weeks before the shoot. We'll advise the art department on colour, opacity or quantity. If the fabric is really stretchy, we'll tell them to put it in the bin! And linen will be creased by the time it gets to set. We like to work with silk, cotton, flax, velvet, canvas, cotton, polyester voile and wool. The flags on Gladiator II were made from the same silk, cotton and flax as they had back then. We did lots of appliqué and cut-outs. SOURCING THE FABRIC Buying the fabric, especially after Brexit, is a huge job, so somebody else does that. You can go through 500 metres of it and sometimes wait weeks for it to arrive. After filming, we might be given leftovers, but on franchises like Harry Potter and Marvel, it's stored in warehouses. For running series, they’ll just go back and repurpose things – change a trim here, cut something down there. MAKING A SMOTHERING PILLOW For My Lady Jane, a period romance on Prime Video, we made a “thunderbox”, a padded 16th century toilet. I’d not made one before, and probably never will again. We also created a pillow that was used to smother the main character, which meant cutting the centre out so it could be placed over her face but allow her to breathe. There’s a pillowcase called the Oxford pillow, which first appeared in the 1860s, that is always requested on Tudor projects. They’re really hard to make and totally historically inaccurate. I’ll occasionally bring up historical inaccuracies and, if I say it with enough love, the art department will listen. CRAFTING A PAPOOSE The Great, I made an 18th century-style papoose. It was so weird, and they put a real baby in it. I remember actor Nicholas Hoult saying, "This baby is not going to like this. It's going to be far too hot." He was right - who'd want to be encased in leather. strapped to a man you don't know? DESIGNING THE FABRIC OF SPACE We do a lot of spaceships, because there’s not an IKEA for space sets! They’re always very hyper-designed and very particular. On Star Wars: The Force Awakens, we upholstered the interiors of the Millennium Falcon, which involved lots of weird shapes. We also made some tents out of fibreglass. DYEING THE DRAPES One of my favourite projects was a set for the Joseph Bologne biopic, Chevalier, in one of Europe’s only remaining baroque theatres in the Czech Republic. My business partner and I made dyed drapes to fit in with the 18th century interior. The place was so old that we had people watching us constantly to ensure we didn’t break anything, but we definitely put our stamp on it. Hedda is released on Prime Video on Wednesday 29th October 2025. Sign up for a 30-day free trial of Prime Video and pay £8.99 a month after that. Check out more of our Film coverage or visit our TV Guide and Streaming Guide to find out what's on. For more TV recommendations and reviews, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.
Top Guns: The Next Generation reveals the life-or-death reality of naval training
For National Geographic’s new docuseries, camera crews were given unprecedented access to the US Navy’s elite jet set.
Yes, there’s volleyball – and moustaches, and lots and lots of American flags. Also motorcycles, pool tables, sunglasses, flight suits, and a synth-heavy soundtrack. In fact, if you remember it from the high-flying Tom Cruise movies, it’s more than likely also here, in Top Guns: The Next Generation. But, this time, it’s real. The latest docuseries from National Geographic follows a class of US Navy and Marine Corps student pilots as they dive and dogfight their way through elite flight training. The six-part series marks the first time camera crews have been granted this behind-the-scenes access, and every episode gives us a better understanding of the characters in these cockpits. We also meet the instructors, on hand to keep the recruits in line and the viewers abreast of more technical terms. In 2024, when the show was filmed, Captain Juston Kuch was the commander of “Training Wing One”, overseeing the programme at Naval Air Station Meridian in Mississippi. As an engineering graduate, Kuch interned at Boeing before joining the Navy, and landed at Meridian for his own training a week before the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Each year, around 150 hopefuls make their way to Mississippi, determined to become the best of the best. “These people were captains of their high school baseball teams,” says Kuch of the trainees. “They were leaders, valedictorians, standout students. But, once you get into flight training, it’s a meritocracy. It doesn’t matter where you came from. We’ve had Ivy League students fail out, and we’ve had students from colleges they could barely pronounce excel in the programme. It comes down to dedication, willingness to get better, and an ability to put in hard work and effort.” And quick reaction times alone don’t put candidates at the top of their class, Kuch reveals. “I’ve actually got incredibly slow reactions to things on the fly,” he says, “but I can always recall procedure, or a checklist. And that’s the key element at this stage of training.” Theories of learning have evolved as well. While advancements in equipment, such as simulator technology, have been significant over the past two decades, Kuch believes that the most pivotal progress has been made in identifying new learning styles and adapting teaching methods for individual students. This is a principal focus of the series: the less-flashy or high-octane, but equally rigorous academic element of the programme. “We wanted to provide an authentic look at the training,” says Kuch. “In the Top Gun films, you see the mission, but how did that individual get there? What were the years – or, in some cases, decades – of training that went into that? “By some accounts,” he adds, “I think Tom Cruise would pass our training in real life! He’s a pretty accomplished aviator, and the motivation he has and preparation he does means he would have no problem with our flight training. Those films really are phenomenal. They may take some liberties with how missions get planned, executed, and debriefed, but the flight scenes are real.” Michael FitzMaurice was the aerial director of photography on Top Gun: Maverick – and was also brought on board to film Top Guns: The Next Generation. His cinematography company, XBrand, previously worked on documentaries about Black Hawk helicopters and the Blue Angels aerobatic display squadron (sort of an American Red Arrows). But this level of military clearance, granted to FitzMaurice and his aerial co-ordinator and pilot Kevin LaRosa II, was their highest yet. “I can’t imagine understanding this story as much had we not seen it from this perspective,” he says. “It’s great being in the cockpit, seeing what the pilot is doing, but to be able to get outside and see the aircraft itself? From a storytelling perspective, that really helps.” Yet filming at altitude can be expensive, so series director Lana Salah began by following the recruits through their ground-based training before handing over to FitzMaurice. “They did a rough edit,” he explains, “before we came in at the end and filmed what was needed to finish the story.” And the jets behind the camera are almost as impressive as those in front, with LaRosa piloting a modified Czech L-39 jet that XBrand affectionately calls the “Cinejet”. “Back in the day,” LaRosa explains, “you’d have an internally mounted camera system inside a jet that used a series of mirrors to get outside – like a submarine periscope. But that image would degrade every time it bounced back and forth on the mirrors, so we took a highly stabilised gimbal meant for helicopters, beefed it up, and put it on a jet.” LaRosa first dreamt up the Cinejet around a decade ago while working with Tom Cruise on Jack Reacher: Never Go Back. “He mentioned then that they were eventually going to make Top Gun 2 – as it was called at the time – and he didn’t realise it, but he planted a seed in my brain. It wasn’t until years later we got the call to do the movie, but during that time period, we had developed the Cinejet.” The Cinejet is behind many of the series’ most dynamic shots, but XBrand also utilised helicopters when they required a steadier airborne vantage point. The series also saw the debut of the world’s first dedicated jet gimbal – a six-axis gyrostabilised set-up that allowed for smooth shooting at altitudes between 6,000ft and 12,000ft, and at speeds of up to 400 knots, or 460mph. “There was a specific sequence our director wanted,” says LaRosa, “of training bombs detaching from the jets. Her dream was for the audience to be literally right next to the bombs as they disconnected from the wings, then follow them to the ground. So we tucked the Cinejet right next to the wing, watched the bombs disconnect, then tracked those weapons down to the targets. It felt like a video game, and no other platform exists in the world that could have got that shot.” “We were absolutely able to do things on Top Guns: The Next Generation that we weren’t even able to achieve on Top Gun: Maverick,” adds FitzMaurice. And it shows. Even on the small screen, the innovation and dedication of the behind-the-scenes teams shines through. It’s a gold standard of coordination and teamwork also evident in the recruits’ training experience, where up to a dozen hours of flight preparation can equate to just one hour in the air. “That’s the work of multiple outstanding individuals,” says Captain Micah Nissly, one of the pilots whose training the show follows. “Maintenance crews. Guys on the ground. Their teamwork and professionalism are just essential. I’m flying a $100 million jet, but there’s so little flight time in comparison to their work.” Nissly enlisted in the Marine Corps and flew with the Blue Angels before arriving in Meridian. This aerobatic experience proved invaluable when facing brutal drills, intense flights and precise carrier landings – undeniably the most thrilling moments of the series. But behind these exhilarating, cinematically shot sequences are many acute mental and physical struggles, such as pilots regularly enduring over six Gs of force. “That’s an extremely humbling experience,” nods Nissly, “because you feel like you’re in top shape, and then you experience those Gs for the first time. It’s like someone sitting on your chest while you’re trying to recite your ABCs. Austin Claggett, who was also in the show with me, related it to working out. He said it’s like doing a squat but – just as you start coming back up – someone adds extra weight onto you.” Alongside Nissly and Claggett, other recruits shadowed for the series include Stephanie Harris, Carissa Meinster and Spenser Neel. Participation was voluntary, says Nissly, but he’s happy to have taken part – and made some new friends along the way. “To be able to go through flight school with these individuals was awesome,” he says, “because no one gets through this alone. The Top Gun movies are great, and we love watching them, but I feel like there’s something slightly missed, especially in the first movie, and that’s the level of camaraderie.” Hollywood has also glamourised pilots’ call signs. Among the real-life instructors we meet during the series, signs include “Duster”, “Ghoul” and “Bambi.” Captain Kuch’s is “Poker”, adopted after a memorable streak at a casino during early training. But Nissly, who is yet to be given his own informal moniker (the signs are not official, and are mostly used during casual communication in the aircraft), says most are considerably less cool than they are in the movies. “‘Maverick’, for example, is an outstanding call sign,” he laughs. “We all aspire to have one that cool. However, they usually come from your worst mistake. This is an awesome career field, but one of the worries I had coming into it was the arrogance. I thought the community would be like: ‘I’m the best there is! No one can top me!’ But that’s not been what I’ve seen, and I think call signs are a good way to humble us.” Watching the series is also a humbling experience. Whether it’s the cinematographic skill or the talent of the recruits, there’s no doubt that we’re watching the best of the best. Even behind those high-flying cameras, there’s genuine life-or-death risk in every episode, and it’s eye-opening to be given such unprecedented insight into this elite world. But still, the moments that hit hardest are human – study troubles, everyday stresses, and those grounding call signs. “No matter how cool of a jet you’re flying, no matter your best day, you’ve still had that rough day,” says Nissly. “You’re still human, and when you’re flying these jets, that’s important to remember.” View oEmbed on the source website Top Guns: The Next Generation airs every Sunday at 9pm on National Geographic until 26th October. Add Top Guns: The Next Generation to your watchlist on the <a id="OWA8b702c45-bee9-94e4-f018-57518e78041b" title="https://www.radiotimes.com/download-the-app/?af_xp=custom&pid=website&c=editorial_content&is_retargeting=true&af_reengagement_window=30d" href="https://www.radiotimes.com/download-the-app/?af_xp=custom&pid=website&c=editorial_content&is_retargeting=true&af_reengagement_window=30d" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-outlook-id="449c28d9-909e-4aab-b6b8-153454f55d5e" data-auth="NotApplicable" data-linkindex="0">Radio Times: What to Watch app – download now for daily TV recommendations, features and more. Check out more of our Documentaries coverage or visit our TV Guide and Streaming Guide to find out what's on. For more TV recommendations and reviews, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.
Meet the real Top Gun pilots facing the life-or-death reality of naval training
For National Geographic’s docuseries Top Gun: The Next Generation, camera crews were given unprecedented access to the US Navy’s elite jet set.
Add Top Gun: The Next Generation to your watchlist Yes, there’s volleyball – and moustaches, and lots and lots of American flags. Also motorcycles, pool tables, sunglasses, flight suits, and a synth-heavy soundtrack. In fact, if you remember it from the high-flying Tom Cruise movies, it’s more than likely also here, in Top Guns: The Next Generation. But, this time, it’s real. The latest docuseries from National Geographic follows a class of US Navy and Marine Corps student pilots as they dive and dogfight their way through elite flight training. The six-part series marks the first time camera crews have been granted this behind-the-scenes access, and every episode gives us a better understanding of the characters in these cockpits. We also meet the instructors, on hand to keep the recruits in line and the viewers abreast of more technical terms. In 2024, when the show was filmed, Captain Juston Kuch was the commander of “Training Wing One”, overseeing the programme at Naval Air Station Meridian in Mississippi. As an engineering graduate, Kuch interned at Boeing before joining the Navy, and landed at Meridian for his own training a week before the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Each year, around 150 hopefuls make their way to Mississippi, determined to become the best of the best. View oEmbed on the source website “These people were captains of their high school baseball teams,” says Kuch of the trainees. “They were leaders, valedictorians, standout students. But, once you get into flight training, it’s a meritocracy. It doesn’t matter where you came from. We’ve had Ivy League students fail out, and we’ve had students from colleges they could barely pronounce excel in the programme. It comes down to dedication, willingness to get better, and an ability to put in hard work and effort.” And quick reaction times alone don’t put candidates at the top of their class, Kuch reveals. “I’ve actually got incredibly slow reactions to things on the fly,” he says, “but I can always recall procedure, or a checklist. And that’s the key element at this stage of training.” Theories of learning have evolved as well. While advancements in equipment, such as simulator technology, have been significant over the past two decades, Kuch believes that the most pivotal progress has been made in identifying new learning styles and adapting teaching methods for individual students. This is a principal focus of the series: the less-flashy or high-octane, but equally rigorous academic element of the programme. “We wanted to provide an authentic look at the training,” says Kuch. “In the Top Gun films, you see the mission, but how did that individual get there? What were the years – or, in some cases, decades – of training that went into that? “By some accounts,” he adds, “I think Tom Cruise would pass our training in real life! He’s a pretty accomplished aviator, and the motivation he has and preparation he does means he would have no problem with our flight training. Those films really are phenomenal. They may take some liberties with how missions get planned, executed, and debriefed, but the flight scenes are real.” Michael FitzMaurice was the aerial director of photography on Top Gun: Maverick – and was also brought on board to film Top Guns: The Next Generation. His cinematography company, XBrand, previously worked on documentaries about Black Hawk helicopters and the Blue Angels aerobatic display squadron (sort of an American Red Arrows). But this level of military clearance, granted to FitzMaurice and his aerial co-ordinator and pilot Kevin LaRosa II, was their highest yet. “I can’t imagine understanding this story as much had we not seen it from this perspective,” he says. “It’s great being in the cockpit, seeing what the pilot is doing, but to be able to get outside and see the aircraft itself? From a storytelling perspective, that really helps.” Yet filming at altitude can be expensive, so series director Lana Salah began by following the recruits through their ground-based training before handing over to FitzMaurice. “They did a rough edit,” he explains, “before we came in at the end and filmed what was needed to finish the story.” And the jets behind the camera are almost as impressive as those in front, with LaRosa piloting a modified Czech L-39 jet that XBrand affectionately calls the “Cinejet”. “Back in the day,” LaRosa explains, “you’d have an internally mounted camera system inside a jet that used a series of mirrors to get outside – like a submarine periscope. But that image would degrade every time it bounced back and forth on the mirrors, so we took a highly stabilised gimbal meant for helicopters, beefed it up, and put it on a jet.” LaRosa first dreamt up the Cinejet around a decade ago while working with Tom Cruise on Jack Reacher: Never Go Back. “He mentioned then that they were eventually going to make Top Gun 2 – as it was called at the time – and he didn’t realise it, but he planted a seed in my brain. It wasn’t until years later we got the call to do the movie, but during that time period, we had developed the Cinejet.” The Cinejet is behind many of the series’ most dynamic shots, but XBrand also utilised helicopters when they required a steadier airborne vantage point. The series also saw the debut of the world’s first dedicated jet gimbal – a six-axis gyrostabilised set-up that allowed for smooth shooting at altitudes between 6,000ft and 12,000ft, and at speeds of up to 400 knots, or 460mph. “There was a specific sequence our director wanted,” says LaRosa, “of training bombs detaching from the jets. Her dream was for the audience to be literally right next to the bombs as they disconnected from the wings, then follow them to the ground. So we tucked the Cinejet right next to the wing, watched the bombs disconnect, then tracked those weapons down to the targets. It felt like a video game, and no other platform exists in the world that could have got that shot.” “We were absolutely able to do things on Top Guns: The Next Generation that we weren’t even able to achieve on Top Gun: Maverick,” adds FitzMaurice. And it shows. Even on the small screen, the innovation and dedication of the behind-the-scenes teams shines through. It’s a gold standard of coordination and teamwork also evident in the recruits’ training experience, where up to a dozen hours of flight preparation can equate to just one hour in the air. “That’s the work of multiple outstanding individuals,” says Captain Micah Nissly, one of the pilots whose training the show follows. “Maintenance crews. Guys on the ground. Their teamwork and professionalism are just essential. I’m flying a $100 million jet, but there’s so little flight time in comparison to their work.” Nissly enlisted in the Marine Corps and flew with the Blue Angels before arriving in Meridian. This aerobatic experience proved invaluable when facing brutal drills, intense flights and precise carrier landings – undeniably the most thrilling moments of the series. But behind these exhilarating, cinematically shot sequences are many acute mental and physical struggles, such as pilots regularly enduring over six Gs of force. “That’s an extremely humbling experience,” nods Nissly, “because you feel like you’re in top shape, and then you experience those Gs for the first time. It’s like someone sitting on your chest while you’re trying to recite your ABCs. Austin Claggett, who was also in the show with me, related it to working out. He said it’s like doing a squat but – just as you start coming back up – someone adds extra weight onto you.” Alongside Nissly and Claggett, other recruits shadowed for the series include Stephanie Harris, Carissa Meinster and Spenser Neel. Participation was voluntary, says Nissly, but he’s happy to have taken part – and made some new friends along the way. “To be able to go through flight school with these individuals was awesome,” he says, “because no one gets through this alone. The Top Gun movies are great, and we love watching them, but I feel like there’s something slightly missed, especially in the first movie, and that’s the level of camaraderie.” Hollywood has also glamourised pilots’ call signs. Among the real-life instructors we meet during the series, signs include “Duster”, “Ghoul” and “Bambi.” Captain Kuch’s is “Poker”, adopted after a memorable streak at a casino during early training. But Nissly, who is yet to be given his own informal moniker (the signs are not official, and are mostly used during casual communication in the aircraft), says most are considerably less cool than they are in the movies. “‘Maverick’, for example, is an outstanding call sign,” he laughs. “We all aspire to have one that cool. However, they usually come from your worst mistake. This is an awesome career field, but one of the worries I had coming into it was the arrogance. I thought the community would be like: ‘I’m the best there is! No one can top me!’ But that’s not been what I’ve seen, and I think call signs are a good way to humble us.” Watching the series is also a humbling experience. Whether it’s the cinematographic skill or the talent of the recruits, there’s no doubt that we’re watching the best of the best. Even behind those high-flying cameras, there’s genuine life-or-death risk in every episode, and it’s eye-opening to be given such unprecedented insight into this elite world. But still, the moments that hit hardest are human – study troubles, everyday stresses, and those grounding call signs. “No matter how cool of a jet you’re flying, no matter your best day, you’ve still had that rough day,” says Nissly. “You’re still human, and when you’re flying these jets, that’s important to remember.”
Chris Lyons has created prosthetic teeth for Harry Potter, Star Wars and Game of Thrones, and most recently, 28 Years Later.
28 Years Later is in cinemas now. Add it to your watchlist Hollywood may be famous for its flawless smiles and bright white veneers, but Chris Lyons – owner of Buckinghamshire-based dental prosthetics firm Fangs FX – deals in a very different type of showbiz teeth. For the last 40 years, Lyons has left a big impression on the world of cinematic gnashers. He has created custom teeth, tusks and all manner of other mandibles for film and television projects – everything from Star Wars to Jurassic World, Indiana Jones to Game of Thrones. He’s brought vampires to blood-sucking life (Nosferatu, Blade, several Draculas), rendered dentures to resurrect real-world figures including Napoleon and Nelson Mandela, and perfected pairs of zombified teeth for World War Z, The Last of Us and, most recently, 28 Years Later – continuing the work he began on the post-apocalyptic franchise in 2002. “For the original 28 Days Later,” says Lyons, “the zombies had their jaws locked open, so we developed a safe breakaway segment that wouldn’t endanger people during action scenes. Spin forward to 28 Years Later, and there are now three types of infected, so three different styles of teeth – some dirty, some broken, some missing. View oEmbed on the source website “We also did Shaun of the Dead,” Lyons adds, “where a zombie’s face had been chewed off, so its teeth were visible. We’re currently doing a TV show where there’s no colour to the zombie’s gums – they’re pale and bloodless. “Each director has a different slant on zombies – it’s the same with vampires. You’ve got Hammer vampires, sexy vampires, and we recently did a project where a vampire had double fangs on each side!” But Lyons loves a challenge. For many years, he and his father co-owned a dental laboratory, supplying hundreds of UK dentists with crowns, bridges and dentures. In 1983, an optician sought their help in casting a pair of chrome cobalt lenses for Superman III, because they worked with the material in dentistry. The success of this project led to them creating prosthetic teeth for Sir Ridley Scott’s Legend, starring Tom Cruise. “It snowballed from there. Three years ago, we sold the dental laboratory, and now all we do is film stuff.” Lyons has almost 1,000 film credits to his name – but his process is always different. Sometimes, an actor will even contact him directly for a pair of false teeth, and surreptitiously wear them on set to get into character. “We made a pair for William Hurt for Lost in Space,” says Lyons. “Halfway through filming, he asked the director, ‘What do you think of my teeth?’ He hadn’t realised! But that’s just what some actors want.” Officially, the make-up designer will bring Lyons on board. He’ll usually be sent a detailed brief, but has also received “drawings on cigarette packets” or been given free rein on a project in the past. “We’re currently doing The Rings of Power,” he says, “and the make-up guys just told me to use my imagination.” Fantasy is where Lyons flourishes, as the genre breeds invention. The Witcher on Netflix features Lyons’s favourite Fangs FX teeth, worn by Norwegian actor Agnes Born in the show’s second season. “They were on the outside of her mouth,” he says of the vampiric design, “but connected to her actual teeth so she could still articulate them.” Much like the design process, the fabrication process frequently changes, but it always begins by casting the actor’s mouth or, occasionally, taking a digital, intraoral scan. From this, a plaster model is created. “On top of that, we’ll sculpt the design in wax, and send it off for approval,” Lyons explains. “Once approved, we’ll make moulds and then create the finished article – using only medical-grade dental materials, and AcrylStains, an emulsion to stain the teeth. “I’ve got a selection of my favourite teeth in my office, but normally they become the property of the production. I’ve been doing Doctor Who for 20 years, but I’ve not got to keep a single pair!” Doctor Who isn’t the only British institution Lyons has worked on. Fangs FX created teeth for every Harry Potter film (and is currently working on the new HBO adaptation). One Harry Potter director even requested Lyons make false fangs for a dog, but these were ultimately nixed in favour of an animatronic. “Very tricky, very hairy,” he says of the experience. And then there’s Bond. “Everybody wants 007 on their CV,” says Lyons, “but it eluded me until I got the call to do Skyfall – and Javier Bardem’s false teeth. For the scene where he takes his teeth out, he had to wear two sets, and take out the ‘good’ teeth to reveal the rotten ones. Then visual effects got involved to make it even messier! But, once I got Bond, I was happy.” Fangs FX also frequently helps to transform actors for biopics – notably recreating the teeth of musicians including Elvis, Bob Marley and Amy Winehouse. Lyons says his highest-profile hour was producing Rami Malek’s Freddie Mercury teeth for the 2018 Oscar-winner, Bohemian Rhapsody. “The lookie-likies can be tough. Freddie Mercury’s teeth are so iconic that there’s a fine line between realism and caricature. We made over 20 sets before we got them right for Rami. Freddie’s real size were far too big, so it was a case of taking them down millimetre by millimetre, adding a little here, taking some off there until we got it.” Fang FX’s impending toothy titles include Sam Mendes’s Beatles biopics, DC’s Supergirl film, another Game of Thrones spin-off and Netflix’s new Wuthering Heights adaptation. We can add to that next year’s sequel to 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple. “For which we also did the lead actors,” says Lyons. “That’s something people don’t consider: if characters are living isolated, with no access to toothbrushes or toothpaste, they wouldn’t have Hollywood teeth, so we have to paint them, make them grimier. “In our line of work, everything’s a challenge – but nothing’s beaten us yet.”
How a British dental technician became Hollywood's go-to guy for special effects teeth
Hollywood may be famous for its flawless smiles and bright white veneers, but Chris Lyons – owner of Buckinghamshire-based dental prosthetics firm Fangs FX – deals in a very different type of showbiz teeth. For the last 40 years, Lyons has left a big impression on the world of cinematic gnashers. He has created custom teeth, tusks and all manner of other mandibles for film and television projects – everything from Star Wars to Jurassic World, Indiana Jones to Game of Thrones. He’s brought vampires to blood-sucking life (Nosferatu, Blade, several Draculas), rendered dentures to resurrect real-world figures including Napoleon and Nelson Mandela, and perfected pairs of zombified teeth for World War Z, The Last of Us and, most recently, 28 Years Later – continuing the work he began on the post-apocalyptic franchise in 2002. “For the original 28 Days Later,” says Lyons, “the zombies had their jaws locked open, so we developed a safe breakaway segment that wouldn’t endanger people during action scenes. Spin forward to 28 Years Later, and there are now three types of infected, so three different styles of teeth – some dirty, some broken, some missing. View oEmbed on the source website “We also did Shaun of the Dead,” Lyons adds, “where a zombie’s face had been chewed off, so its teeth were visible. We’re currently doing a TV show where there’s no colour to the zombie’s gums – they’re pale and bloodless. “Each director has a different slant on zombies – it’s the same with vampires. You’ve got Hammer vampires, sexy vampires, and we recently did a project where a vampire had double fangs on each side!” But Lyons loves a challenge. For many years, he and his father co-owned a dental laboratory, supplying hundreds of UK dentists with crowns, bridges and dentures. In 1983, an optician sought their help in casting a pair of chrome cobalt lenses for Superman III, because they worked with the material in dentistry. The success of this project led to them creating prosthetic teeth for Sir Ridley Scott’s Legend, starring Tom Cruise. “It snowballed from there. Three years ago, we sold the dental laboratory, and now all we do is film stuff.” Lyons has almost 1,000 film credits to his name – but his process is always different. Sometimes, an actor will even contact him directly for a pair of false teeth, and surreptitiously wear them on set to get into character. “We made a pair for William Hurt for Lost in Space,” says Lyons. “Halfway through filming, he asked the director, ‘What do you think of my teeth?’ He hadn’t realised! But that’s just what some actors want.” Officially, the make-up designer will bring Lyons on board. He’ll usually be sent a detailed brief, but has also received “drawings on cigarette packets” or been given free rein on a project in the past. “We’re currently doing The Rings of Power,” he says, “and the make-up guys just told me to use my imagination.” Fantasy is where Lyons flourishes, as the genre breeds invention. The Witcher on Netflix features Lyons’s favourite Fangs FX teeth, worn by Norwegian actor Agnes Born in the show’s second season. “They were on the outside of her mouth,” he says of the vampiric design, “but connected to her actual teeth so she could still articulate them.” Much like the design process, the fabrication process frequently changes, but it always begins by casting the actor’s mouth or, occasionally, taking a digital, intraoral scan. From this, a plaster model is created. “On top of that, we’ll sculpt the design in wax, and send it off for approval,” Lyons explains. “Once approved, we’ll make moulds and then create the finished article – using only medical-grade dental materials, and AcrylStains, an emulsion to stain the teeth. “I’ve got a selection of my favourite teeth in my office, but normally they become the property of the production. I’ve been doing Doctor Who for 20 years, but I’ve not got to keep a single pair!” Doctor Who isn’t the only British institution Lyons has worked on. Fangs FX created teeth for every Harry Potter film (and is currently working on the new HBO adaptation). One Harry Potter director even requested Lyons make false fangs for a dog, but these were ultimately nixed in favour of an animatronic. “Very tricky, very hairy,” he says of the experience. And then there’s Bond. “Everybody wants 007 on their CV,” says Lyons, “but it eluded me until I got the call to do Skyfall – and Javier Bardem’s false teeth. For the scene where he takes his teeth out, he had to wear two sets, and take out the ‘good’ teeth to reveal the rotten ones. Then visual effects got involved to make it even messier! But, once I got Bond, I was happy.” Fangs FX also frequently helps to transform actors for biopics – notably recreating the teeth of musicians including Elvis, Bob Marley and Amy Winehouse. Lyons says his highest-profile hour was producing Rami Malek’s Freddie Mercury teeth for the 2018 Oscar-winner, Bohemian Rhapsody. “The lookie-likies can be tough. Freddie Mercury’s teeth are so iconic that there’s a fine line between realism and caricature. We made over 20 sets before we got them right for Rami. Freddie’s real size were far too big, so it was a case of taking them down millimetre by millimetre, adding a little here, taking some off there until we got it.” Fang FX’s impending toothy titles include Sam Mendes’s Beatles biopics, DC’s Supergirl film, another Game of Thrones spin-off and Netflix’s new Wuthering Heights adaptation. We can add to that next year’s sequel to 28 Years Later, The Bone Temple. “For which we also did the lead actors,” says Lyons. “That’s something people don’t consider: if characters are living isolated, with no access to toothbrushes or toothpaste, they wouldn’t have Hollywood teeth, so we have to paint them, make them grimier. “In our line of work, everything’s a challenge – but nothing’s beaten us yet.” 28 Years Later is in UK cinemas from 19th June. Check out more of our Film coverage or visit our TV Guide and Streaming Guide to find out what's on. For more from the biggest stars in TV, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.
The comedian laments the decline of the panel shows that made him
What’s the view from your sofa? In Friends, after someone tells Joey they don’t have a TV, he asks, “But what’s all your furniture pointed at?” That’s how I feel about my living room. Everything is geared up to face the TV. But it’s been a while since I sat on my sofa. Usually, I’m immediately horizontal. Who controls the remote at home? I insist on controlling the remote, and it’s a source of much tension between my partner and me! We’ve got a couple of remotes, including one for the TV, although you have to turn the PlayStation on if you want to watch a Blu-ray. It’s become untenable. What’s most shouted in the house is, “Where is one of the f***ing remotes?” What have you watched recently? The US comedy Abbott Elementary created by actress Quinta Brunson. I like that a lot. It reminds me of the US network shows that I grew up on, with 20 weekly episodes. I want more shows like that. There’s something comforting about having a show and a group of characters you can dip into once a week. What did you watch as a child? Growing up, the biggest currency in my household was being funny, so we all bonded over watching old British sitcoms: Fawlty Towers, Only Fools and Horses, but also stuff from America, like Bewitched. My grandfather loved sitcoms. Eventually, I got him into The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air. There’s something about South Asian grandparents and The Fresh Prince… they love it! Did you ever watch comedians on TV? I remember seeing Chris Rock’s Bigger & Blacker special on Channel 4, and now my stand-up is a squeaky-voiced man of colour shrieking about the news. I suppose the apple didn’t fall far from that tree… Would you say panel shows were your “big break”? There was a period during the 2000s where a good episode of Mock the Week could sell out your tour, so maybe I lived through the golden age of panel shows. They helped me learn how to be on TV. By the time I did Have I Got News for You, I knew loosely what to expect. They were a fantastic way of bringing through new comedians. If they disappear, it’ll be a loss to British comedy. There are fewer now — so is it harder for new comedians to break through? People my age are like Indiana Jones’s hat – the door was closing, a generation ahead of us slipped under and they reached back to grab us. Today, it’s a lot more difficult because you need multiple skills. You need to film, edit and post on Instagram and TikTok. Those are skills we didn’t need to have. Who is currently making you laugh? My support acts – Kemah Bob, Priya Hall, Sara Barron – are all phenomenal. My ex-flatmate, Rose Matafeo, is the figurehead of a boom in New Zealand comics, perhaps thanks to the legacy of Flight of the Conchords. James Acaster is a genius, much to my displeasure. And Amy Annette – but I’m obliged to acknowledge that she has been my partner of 13 years… Your tour has gone all over the world. What do you credit its success to? I think I loosely have to thank Taskmaster. There’s an international community of people interested in British comedy because of that show. There’s also an interesting energy doing political comedy right now, especially in America. There’s an appetite to hear what I’m saying, expressed in the manner I’m saying it. Is it hard doing political comedy now? It was harder in the mid-2010s. People are more engaged now. But I’ve also honed my audience. Wherever I am in the world, there’ll be a person in their 20s at my gig with a cool haircut and a T-shirt that says something like “Unions Forever”. I see that and think, “Fantastic, my work is done”.
Nish Kumar says panel shows disappearing would be "a loss" to British comedy
Kumar spoke with this week's issue of Radio Times magazine.
This article first appeared in Radio Times magazine. What’s the view from your sofa? In Friends, after someone tells Joey they don’t have a TV, he asks, “But what’s all your furniture pointed at?” That’s how I feel about my living room. Everything is geared up to face the TV. But it’s been a while since I sat on my sofa. Usually, I’m immediately horizontal. Who controls the remote at home? I insist on controlling the remote, and it’s a source of much tension between my partner and me! We’ve got a couple of remotes, including one for the TV, although you have to turn the PlayStation on if you want to watch a Blu-ray. It’s become untenable. What’s most shouted in the house is, “Where is one of the f***ing remotes?” What have you watched recently? The US comedy Abbott Elementary created by actress Quinta Brunson. I like that a lot. It reminds me of the US network shows that I grew up on, with 20 weekly episodes. I want more shows like that. There’s something comforting about having a show and a group of characters you can dip into once a week. What did you watch as a child? Growing up, the biggest currency in my household was being funny, so we all bonded over watching old British sitcoms: Fawlty Towers, Only Fools and Horses, but also stuff from America, like Bewitched. My grandfather loved sitcoms. Eventually, I got him into The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air. There’s something about South Asian grandparents and The Fresh Prince… they love it! Did you ever watch comedians on TV? I remember seeing Chris Rock’s Bigger & Blacker special on Channel 4, and now my stand-up is a squeaky-voiced man of colour shrieking about the news. I suppose the apple didn’t fall far from that tree… Would you say panel shows were your “big break”? There was a period during the 2000s where a good episode of Mock the Week could sell out your tour, so maybe I lived through the golden age of panel shows. They helped me learn how to be on TV. By the time I did Have I Got News for You, I knew loosely what to expect. They were a fantastic way of bringing through new comedians. If they disappear, it’ll be a loss to British comedy. There are fewer now — so is it harder for new comedians to break through? People my age are like Indiana Jones’s hat – the door was closing, a generation ahead of us slipped under and they reached back to grab us. Today, it’s a lot more difficult because you need multiple skills. You need to film, edit and post on Instagram and TikTok. Those are skills we didn’t need to have. Who is currently making you laugh? My support acts – Kemah Bob, Priya Hall, Sara Barron – are all phenomenal. My ex-flatmate, Rose Matafeo, is the figurehead of a boom in New Zealand comics, perhaps thanks to the legacy of Flight of the Conchords. James Acaster is a genius, much to my displeasure. And Amy Annette – but I’m obliged to acknowledge that she has been my partner of 13 years… Your tour has gone all over the world. What do you credit its success to? I think I loosely have to thank Taskmaster. There’s an international community of people interested in British comedy because of that show. There’s also an interesting energy doing political comedy right now, especially in America. There’s an appetite to hear what I’m saying, expressed in the manner I’m saying it. Is it hard doing political comedy now? It was harder in the mid-2010s. People are more engaged now. But I’ve also honed my audience. Wherever I am in the world, there’ll be a person in their 20s at my gig with a cool haircut and a T-shirt that says something like “Unions Forever”. I see that and think, “Fantastic, my work is done”. The latest issue of Radio Times is out now – subscribe here. Check out more of our Comedy coverage or visit our TV Guide and Streaming Guide to find out what's on. For more from the biggest stars in TV, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.
Daredevil: Born Again costume designer explains absence of "DD" symbol in season 1
Fans have waited a decade for the comic-accurate look...
Over the years, Daredevil has worn plenty of supersuits on screen – but only one has ever featured the character’s comic-accurate “DD” logo: before Ben Affleck became Batman, his middling 2003 take on Daredevil was zipped into a skintight leather number that bore the intertwined letters on its blood-red front. But, when the baton – or should that be billy club? – was handed to Charlie Cox in 2015, Netflix gave audiences a more gritty, grounded version of the Marvel hero, one who wore black combat trousers and a scarf around his head. It wasn’t until the end of the first Netflix season that he even got a supersuit. There were two additional seasons of the Netflix show, followed by Cox cameos in Spider-Man: No Way Home, She-Hulk: Attorney at Law and Echo, before a triumphant return in Daredevil: Born Again, currently streaming on Disney Plus. The suits during this time have ranged from the deep red of Daredevil’s Netflix days to a gold-trimmed take in She-Hulk. And yet, every time the superhero has somersaulted back onto our screens, there’s been no “DD” logo on his chest. “The ‘DD’ logo on Daredevil’s suit is a big thing for the character,” says Emily Gunshor, costume designer for Born Again, whose previous work includes DC’s Stargirl. “A lot of fans want to see the logo on his chest. But, for this season’s red suit, it was a specific story point and a very specific discussion that we were not going to put the ‘DD’ on his chest. “There are discussions I can weigh in on and offer opinions on, but, ultimately, for these comic book projects, it goes to a higher level.” The Born Again suits, however, are some of the superhero’s best. Gunshor’s team worked with Ironhead Studio, a specialty costume shop in Los Angeles, to create Daredevil’s costumes for Born Again. They had five suits made for the nine-episode season – three for Cox, two for his stunt double. “We could have used a whole lot more,” laughs Gunshor. “But these things are expensive!” The idea of other characters’ suits – Bullseye, White Tiger and Muse – was that they’re all a little more homespun. “We made all three in-house, with the idea that they’re shopping at the superhero tactical store and then augmenting,” reveals Gunshor. “Muse is one of my favourite characters, with a suit made out of canvas. But if you’ve ever painted on canvas, you’ll know it has zero stretch. So, to achieve the muscle fit and body contouring, we used a super-stretchy fabric that we painted and dyed to make look like canvas.” To ensure there were no continuity errors in Daredevil’s suit, the team was forced to improvise, constantly swapping out various suit parts and panels after destructive fight scenes. They would also modify the suits using pieces of elastic, Gunshor reveals, if Cox found them to be uncomfortable in places, or slip when he moved. “The objective for this Daredevil was to make a sleeker suit,” Gunshor explains. “Something more streamlined than he wore in She-Hulk and Echo. We wanted to maintain the shape of the face and horns, and the fabric was 3D-printed so we could change the pattern and texture of different pieces.” Daredevil’s eyes, for example, were made “really, really red” for Born Again. The helmets featured magnetic eye sockets, and three types of lenses that clicked into place. For the most dangerous stunts, the entire eye section could be removed to increase the stunt performer’s peripheral vision. For minor stunts, clear lenses were used, which VFX coloured in post-production. For dramatic close-ups, vivid red lenses were used. The team consulted many comic books to find this latest shade of “Daredevil red”, deciding to move away from the darker Netflix colour. “Our red is brighter,” says Gunshor. “We looked at lots of different shades from the comics. We didn’t want to go ‘Deadpool red’, but we still wanted the new suit to pop a little brighter.” Born Again’s second season is currently filming – a task Gunshor says she was “definitely ready” for after overcoming the challenges of season 1 – and recent set photos of Cox in costume have emerged online, suggesting we could be about to see the small-screen debut of a certain “DD” logo. But, as for what else is in store for Daredevil's return, that remains a typically tight-lipped, Marvel-guarded secret. View Affiliate Playlist on the source website Daredevil: Born Again is available to stream on Disney Plus. Check out more of our Sci-Fi coverage or visit our TV Guide and Streaming Guide to find out what's on. For more from the biggest stars in TV, listen to The Radio Times Podcast.
'Our technicians smash it with a hammer!'
New York foundry manager Jake Joyce reveals how Oscars are made
Add this year's Oscars to your watchlist Since the first Academy Awards ceremony in 1929, only one Hollywood icon has made the guest list every single year. He’s statuesque, gleams ever gold — and stands at 13 ½ inches high and weighs 8 ½ pounds. His official name, the Academy Award of Merit, fell into disuse decades ago, replaced simply by Oscar. The statuette is legendary: an Art Deco knight, hands clasped around the hilt of his sword, stood atop a five-spoked reel of film, with each spoke representing a branch of the original Academy – acting, writing, directing, producing and technical roles. Almost a century after Cedric Gibbons – art director on many famous films including The Wizard of Oz and Singin’ in the Rain – designed the award in 1928, Jake Joyce, a second-generation metalworker, runs UAP, the New York foundry where every modern Oscar is made. “They’re heavier than you’d expect,” says Joyce, “because they’re cast in solid bronze. There are 110 people in our workshop and an Oscar will probably pass through at least half of the hands here.” Throughout the 20th Century, Oscars were created using everything from britannia, a pewter-like alloy, to painted plaster during the Second World War when there was a metal shortage. However, the statues have been cast in their original metal, bronze, since 2016. That’s when the team at UAP was approached by Academy officials, who wanted a return to a more traditional casting process and design. “They supplied us with both an original George Stanley-sculpted Oscar from 1929 and a more modern version,” says Joyce. “We digitally scanned both and worked with the Academy to select attributes from each that worked. We slightly adjusted the model, but just minor stylistic tweaks – like the detailing of the film reel the statue stands on.” The foundry, of which Joyce is the general manager, employs the lost wax process, a 6,000-year-old method of replicating a model in a more permanent material. Using a series of mouldings and castings, it’s a time-intensive process that begins by 3D-printing a high-resolution master copy of the Oscar that’s then used to create a rubber production mould. “That’s the first mould,” explains Joyce. “We use that to cast a wax copy of the Oscar. The team then removes any imperfections by hand, and we invest the wax copy into a ceramic shell.” That process involves dipping the wax copy into a liquid ceramic mixture several times to create a shell that is durable enough for hot metal to be poured into, and after that stage it’s ready for casting. UAP sources its bronze from several trusted suppliers. “The main source of recycled copper, like recycled power lines and wires,” says Joyce. Before casting, the team treats the molten metal with various inert gases to remove any hydrogen or oxygen that may be dissolved in the bronze. This ensures a cleaner, smoother casting. “We melt the bronze in an induction furnace at 2000°F, and heat the ceramic shell in a kiln at 1500°F,” explains Joyce. “Then the metal is poured into the shell from a crucible. It’s left to cool overnight, before our technicians take the mould we’ve spent weeks making and smash it off with a hammer!” This reveals the raw casting, which is passed to the foundry’s finishing department. Here, craftspeople file down any join marks or imperfections on the Oscar and give it a thorough polish. “Once the Oscar is polished,” says Joyce, “it’s copper-plated, then nickel-plated – polishing and buffing between every plating – before it’s finally given it a beautiful gold-plating. Gold doesn’t oxidise, so that means an Oscar requires no maintenance.” The bronze surface of the statue base does oxidise, however, which would results in a black patina appearing on the surface. To prevent that they are protected with a wax coating and sealed at the bottom with an aluminium disc. Then the Oscar statue is drilled, tapped and bolted on to the base. This is followed by another stringent round of quality control checks before each statue is slipped into a custom-stitched protective cloth bag, nestled into a foam insert and boxed up. “This is the original way that the Oscars were made,” says Joyce of the meticulous process. “And then, over time, they moved toward using a lower-quality metal, more like trophy production. We’re so happy that it’s back to its original. We’re incredibly proud of making the Oscars, and it never gets old watching amazing, talented people receiving these iconic awards.”