When Mexican cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki, or Chivo, as he is affectionately nicknamed, first read the screenplay for âDisclaimerâ by his lifelong friend and director Alfonso CuarĂłn, he was struck by the intricate descriptions of the changing visual mood as the story progresses.
âThis is the first time where the lighting is so detailed in his script,â Lubezki, 59, says on the phone speaking in English. âAlfonso describes the color of the sky in the morning, the height of the sun, the angle of the light entering the kitchen. It was so beautifully written.â
Even after more than 40 years of friendship and fruitful artistic confrontations, CuarĂłn and Lubezki are still inspiring, and sometimes exasperating, each other. Together, via the miracle of cinema, they have imagined and materialized heart-pulsing images in a dystopian future, a lyrical road trip through southern Mexico and even an outer space adventure.
CuarĂłn, 62, refers to their affinity as âtelepathic.â Between them, thereâs a common understating of the elements within the frame, as well as a mutual concern for crafting images where any stylistic choice is secondary to the substance of what they communicate.
âThere are many cinematographers whose work is beautiful, but there isnât an organicity to the cinematic language in what they do,â CuarĂłn says. âBut for Chivo, aesthetics exist only in function of the cinematic language. He understands that in a radical, even religious way.â
The Apple TV+ limited series âDisclaimer,â premiering Friday, reunites the two Oscar winners for the first time since 2013âs astronaut drama âGravity,â one of their many shared projects since the 1980s.
âThe collaboration with Chivo begins from the moment I have the idea, and then throughout the writing process I continue discussing ideas with him,â CuarĂłn tells me over a video call in Spanish from the Toronto International Film Festival, where âDisclaimerâ screened last month.
At the center of âDisclaimerâ is acclaimed documentary filmmaker Catherine Ravenscroft (Cate Blanchett), whose hidden past has reemerged to haunt her in the form of a recently published book, as well as in the machinations of a man named Stephen Brigstocke (Kevin Kline) seeking retribution. (Young Catherine is played by Leila George in the series.)
Kevin Kline as Stephen Brigstocke in âDisclaimer.â (Apple)
Cate Blanchett as Catherine Ravenscroft in âDisclaimer.â (Apple)
CuarĂłn received the 2015 novel that the series is based on from author RenĂŠe Knight about a decade ago as a galley proof. While he found it thematically rich, it was the use of narration in different grammatical persons to express distinct perspectives that most intrigued him.
However, at the onset, CuarĂłn was unsure about how to turn the original material into a conventional film. It was only several years later, following his semiautobiographical film âRoma,â that he realized how he could adapt it. He revisited miniseries such as Ingmar Bergmanâs 1973 six-part series âScenes From a Marriage,â Rainer Werner Fassbinderâs 1980 14-part series âBerlin Alexanderplatzâ and the more recent âLiâl Quinquin,â Bruno Dumontâs 2014 film that was released as a four-part miniseries, where each of the renowned directors told a longer-format story but still retained the integrity of a singular artistic voice throughout.
Lubezki recalls CuarĂłn explaining to him that âDisclaimerâ would exist in episodic form.
âAlfonso said, âItâs really a film, but they may release it as a series, and I donât know if you mind that itâs not going to be released in theaters.â I said, âI donât care,ââ Lubezki recalls. âI wanted to do it, especially after not being able to do âRoma.â It really hurt me that I wasnât there with him.â
Throughout the making of this âlong movie,â neither CuarĂłn nor Lubezki ever considered it television. CuarĂłn wrote one screenplay with more than 300 pages, and later divided that into chapters based on the pieceâs dramatic modulations.
âItâs the vision of one director,â Lubezki says. âHe directed all the chapters â he will kill me if I call them episodes â which almost killed him because it was enormous.â
âThere are four fundamental narratives in âDisclaimer,ââ CuarĂłn explains. âThere are three voice-overs: one in the first person, one in the second person and one in the third person. And then there is the narrative that happens in the book thatâs published within the story. I told Chivo that each of these narratives should have a unique filmic language.â
For the first-person narrative, which follows Klineâs character on a mission to inflict pain on Catherine, the person he blames for his misfortunes â the loss of his family and a job that heâs grown increasingly despondent in â we see the world directly through his eyes, whether itâs a sandwich he eats in his increasingly filthy kitchen or the photographs he finds tucked in his dead wifeâs purse, discovered under a wardrobe. For Blanchettâs part, told in the second person, the approach is more distant, as if observing her clinically from a distance.
âThe second-person narrative has rarely been used in both film and literature â almost all narratives are told in the first or third person,â CuarĂłn says. He says he first experienced the second-person narrative employed onscreen in the 1974 French film âThe Man Who Sleepsâ co-directed by Bernard Queysanne and novelist Georges Perec based on the latterâs novel.
For comparison, the narration that actor Daniel Gimenez Cacho does in CuarĂłnâs âY Tu MamĂĄ TambiĂŠnâ is in the third person. He is telling the audience about the two friends.
Gael GarcĂa Bernal in âCassandroâ is yet another example of the Mexican actorâs versatility. From his feature debut in Alejandro GonzĂĄlez Iùårrituâs âAmores Perros,â he has played roles that have earned him praise in his native Mexico and abroad.
âThe narrative lines of my other films are quite simple, clear and linear, and there is not much dialogue in them,â CuarĂłn explains. â[âDisclaimerâ] has many dramatic lines. Itâs a narrative clockwork where dialogue also has a more important role.â
And thatâs why CuarĂłn thought it imperative for his writing to highlight the visual details of the drama, which Lubezki says stunned him upon first reading the adaptation.
Realizing this would be a massive undertaking, Lubezki became worried about the projectâs demands. Luckily the two are on the same frequency, and CuarĂłn agreed it would be prudent to hire another cinematographer.
âWhen he said, âWho do you think this person should be?â I said, âIt should be Bruno [Delbonnel],â and Alfonso said, âI had thought about him too,ââ Lubezki says.
Delbonnel (who shot the beloved French classic âAmĂŠlieâ) was tasked mostly with shooting the sections told in the third person, which pertain to people in Catherineâs life, such as her husband, Robert (Sacha Baron Cohen), whose scenes in the aftermath of learning a secret are filmed with a handheld camera, even using zooms to capture the anxiety he feels with visual immediacy.
On the other hand, Lubezki and CuarĂłn decided that they would present Blanchettâs storyline in real time. It entailed longer takes without any additional coverage and Blanchettâs movements dictating where Lubezkiâs camera went in a sort of choreography.
âOften what we were doing was learning to dance with Cate,â says CuarĂłn, who believes both Blanchettâs and Lubezkiâs contributions to âDisclaimerâ were integral in shaping it. Both are executive producers on the project.
âHis credit as executive producer is not just a reward,â CuarĂłn says. âThe collaboration with Chivo is from start to finish, it is not only in the image. It goes beyond that.â
CuarĂłn and Lubezki first became friends after frequenting the same art-house cinema, the CUC (Centro Universitario Cultural), in the south of Mexico City, where every weekend, films by international masters such as Ingmar Bergman, Akira Kurosawa or Federico Fellini would screen.
âWe always ran into each other there because it was also the meeting place for teenagers to go out and party that same night,â CuarĂłn recalls. âOn many occasions I ended up talking with Chivo for hours at a party about what we had just seen at the cinema. We were the geeks in the corner of the room talking about movies.â
Lubezki remembers CuarĂłn holding court outside the CUC. âMany times, coming out of the theater I would see CuarĂłn surrounded by beautiful girls talking about things like the use of color in [Michelangelo] Antonioniâs movies,â he says. The younger Lubezki admired CuarĂłn, who represented a source of culture.
CuarĂłn was already a student at CUEC (Centro Universitario de Estudios CinematogrĂĄficos) when Lubezki was admitted into the competitive film school. At that point, Lubezki had already tried his hand at still photography, and his natural ability for thinking outside the box surprised CuarĂłn, who back then often shot projects for fellow students.
âI saw the first exercise he did on Super 8 film stock and at that moment I said to myself, âWhat am I doing? Chivo is a real cinematographer,ââ CuarĂłn remembers. âAlready in that early school exercise, he was transgressing all the principles that we knew.â
These days, Lubezkiâs fascination with light continues to define how he relates to the world. âYou could be having dinner with him in a restaurant where there is a little lamp or a candle on the table, and he doesnât even realize it anymore but he subtly starts to adjust the light,â CuarĂłn tells me. Signs of where Lubezkiâs passion lay were evident to CuarĂłn as early as the days when he would bring him on jobs as a second assistant director.
âI can tell you that Chivo was the worst second assistant director that has ever existed in history, because he absolutely didnât care about his job as assistant director, le valĂa madres,â CuarĂłn says. âHe was more focused on the light.â
They both agree that with age, the visceral edge of their professional arguments has (mostly) mellowed out since their time making âLa Hora Marcada,â a Mexican horror anthology series, in the late 1980s. They never thought of it as âmaking TV,â but remember it as a crucial training ground to learn in a professional setting.
âWhen we work together and I feel that something is not right or that it could be better, thereâs this whole Mexican confrontational thing between us of, âCabrĂłn, come on,â but itâs all to try to make the best film possible,â Lubezki says.
âIf we have a disagreement and he tells me, âYouâre not going to like it,â I know Iâm not going to like it,â CuarĂłn says. âAnd if I tell him, âThatâs not going to work,â he knows that thatâs not going to work. And itâs not that it doesnât work technically, but creatively itâs not going to work. We immediately stop and start to see what the other option is.â
Based on their memories, the most contentious of their collaborations might be the futuristic thriller âChildren of Men.â CuarĂłn recalls threatening to shoot a scene inside a vehicle using a green screen if Lubezki couldnât figure out a way to do it without cuts. And Lubezki thinks of another complex long take in the film that involved tanks and a shootout where fake blood got on the cameraâs lens and he decided to keep on shooting, going against CuarĂłnâs orders. Lubezkiâs risky move paid off because the end result was exhilarating. âThatâs one of the shots he was lucky that I was close to the camera and that we didnât stop,â the cinematographer adds.
Alfonso CuarĂłn and Emmanuel Lubezki filmed âChildrenâsâ tough chase scene without breaking their rules.
To explain the tug-of-war that happens between him and CuarĂłn when they work together, Lubezki refers to a story that the late actor Peter OâToole once shared. OâToole had sent a leather jacket to the dry cleaners. When it returned, it had a note attached. It was the establishment apologizing for not being able to leave it spotless. âIt distresses us to return work which is not perfect,â the note read.
Therein lies the Mexican duoâs artistic ethos.
âIt distresses us, [Alfonso and I], to create work which is not perfect, and that is horrendous because it means that thereâs pain when you are working because perfection is probably impossible to reach,â Lubezki says. âYou are attempting to make it as perfect as possible, knowing that itâs probably impossible, but you donât give up.â
In that pursuit of the unattainable, the two amigos often have achieved cinematic brilliance together.
âChivo is an alchemist. He challenges creative and technological limitations,â says CuarĂłn about his closest partner behind the camera.
âAlfonso is the most important film teacher in my life,â says Lubezki, reinforcing their bond. âAnd he is one of the great directors of our time.â
âDisclaimerâ didnât rekindle such mutual devotion; it simply presented a new opportunity for them to profess it onscreen.
More to Read
The complete guide to home viewing
Get Screen Gab for everything about the TV shows and streaming movies everyoneâs talking about.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.