STACK NZ Mar #60

56 / 58

with DARIO RUSSO.
1 2
generation of kids – we were exposed to a
lot of children’s programs that had puppets
and stop motion animated characters. The
nostalgic heart lies with puppets, and now
we can put it into an adult context. I think a
lot of people respond to that, even if it’s on
a subconscious level.
Tell us about your first recollections of
watching Shaun Micallef, and how you
felt when he asked to be involved with
series two of Danger 5.
I remember being young enough to
not really know what I was watching,
and laughing at Milo Kerrigan. I think that
qualifies as Micallef always being in my
life. Full Frontal and Fast Forward – that’s
my first recollection of Shaun Micallef,
so having him actually engage us was
absolutely surreal, such an unbelievably
positive affirmation to have this dude
involved who you respect so much. I still
don’t really believe it happened. I watch the
show now and... “F*ck, Shaun Micallef’s in
this!”
Danger 5 reminds us of other curious,
surreal comedies with intentionally
cheap effects like The Mighty Boosh and
Garth Marenghi’s Dark Place . Are you a
fan?
DARIO RUSSO: I loved Boosh when
it came out. That was always such an
excitingly unusual show; it was really
inspiring to see something that bizarre.
That was definitely a massive inspiration, as
was Garth Marenghi , which I guess is more
directly comparable to the style of things
that we’re doing. [Marenghi] was a very
conscious and deliberate retro rip-off, and
what we’re doing is too bastardised to even
be an accurate ‘80s retro rip-off.
Your previous series, Italian
Spiderman, utilises cheap production to
great effect, too. Have you always found
this funny as a style device?
Especially at high school, I would always
love watching shitty ‘80s horror movies
with my friends and laughing at them, sort
of, in parts where the production values
had fallen short. And if you go back to the
‘50s, especially with movies like Plan 9 from
Outer Space, which is heralded as – arguably
– the worst film ever made... they’re clearly,
earnestly trying to create a special effect and
it’s not fooling anybody. That’s funny.
Was this always a deliberate part of your
filmmaking, or did it begin from literally
having no budget?
I mean look, we’ve got talking lion creatures,
we’ve got people dematerialising, we’ve got
an anaconda strangling two men. We do not
– and never would – have a budget to create
a sense that even vaguely resembles reality,
and at the same time I don’t think we really
want to. Because it’s like a live action cartoon;
the suspension of disbelief is out the window
to start off with, and then it’s more about a
fun representation of everything.
Why do you prefer actual crafted objects
to CGI?
I just think people have a better time when
they’re looking at puppets rather than at
CGI. You know it’s fake either way, so screw
it – why not actually have a tangible object
that the actor can respond to? I think that
speaks to the early ‘90s upbringing and my