Philippe Lesage on his ambitious new film Who by Fire, a cautionary tale about meeting your heroes

With an English title taken from a song by Leonard Cohen, Philipe Lesage’s Who by Fire understands that growing up walks hand in hand with death. Death can be literal — the loss of a loved one or a beloved companion — but it can also be metaphysical: an ego death, the death of a dream or the end of childish fantasies. Set in a cabin in the woods owned and occupied by a filmmaker, the movie follows 17-year old Jeff (Noah Parker) as he navigates a brutal coming-of-age marked by disillusionment and yearning. 

As the film opens, Jeff, Max (Antoine Marchand-Gagnon) and Aliocha (Aurélia Arandi-Longpré) are seated in the backseat of a car. Max and Aliocha’s father Albert (Paul Ahmarani) is driving them to an airfield, where they will be flown to a remote cabin in the woods owned by Blake (Arieh Worthalter), Albert’s former collaborator and Jeff’s favourite filmmaker. In this sequence, Jeff’s fingers briefly brush up against Aliocha’s leg, just before her father plays a prank on all of them. 

Once they arrive at the cabin, Jeff is overjoyed to be able to spend time with Blake, but soon the dream turns into a nightmare. The forest doesn’t seem ripe with hope, but danger; pleasure gives way to psychological games that destabilize Jeff’s identity and place in the world. The towering icon of Blake, the great filmmaker, soon becomes a monstrous incarnation of all of Jeff’s fears as competition and rivalry take hold.

Who by Fire, Lesage’s anticipated follow-up to Genèse, won the Best Film in the Génération14plus category at the Berlin film festival at its premiere earlier this year. With a runtime of 2 hours and 35 minutes, the film overflows with ambition, in the sense that, for Lesage, it’s a massive undertaking, and a work that deals quite plainly with the idea of aspiration. While Jeff is an aspiring filmmaker, he’s confronted with an adult world that often feels petty and cruel, rather than liberated and inspired. It’s a movie about wanting to create — making films, making love and how often time and opportunity slips us by. 

Director Philippe Lesage sat down with us in Montreal to discuss making the film.

Justine Smith: The film is structured around these extremely long, unedited dinner sequences. They feel very raw and spontaneous. How improvised are they?

Philippe Lesage: I knew they were going to be a big part of the film and I really want my actors, in general, to take the script and make it their own. I don’t even read the script when I’m on set, it goes into the garbage. I really want to start from a point where we’re looking for moments and we’re almost forgetting that we’re making a film; where there’s this kind of magic, spontaneous, authentic thing happening on set.

There are two things I need to do: many takes, and to give a lot of freedom to the actors. If they want to stand or get a coffee, they could if they wanted to. They completely changed the structure of the dialogue sometimes, especially in the first dinner scene, with a lot of people overlapping each other. There are of course main things that they need to be hitting because that’s the scene and you can’t avoid it.

For Blake and Albert especially, because they have no such dialogue in the film, even in casting I was really looking for guys who were very good with adding stuff and being very creative with words. In the first casting where Arieh (Worthalter) and Paul (Ahmarani) met, it was actually on Zoom, there was something extremely special about it. Some actors are not at ease with it at all. It has nothing to do with the quality of the actor, they can be very good at different things. But, for those specific roles, it was absolutely fundamental that they had this capability. Everybody needs to understand that there’s going to be a lot of improvising and overlapping dialogue with mundane or banal conversations. Everybody was in that kind of mood. 

There’s a beautiful Taoist saying that is very important for me and very beautiful. It says that the best swimmer forgets that he is in the water. It’s because you have this kind of ease. We all experience those moments, even when you’re writing — I’m sure you’ve gotten completely into that moment. Almost everybody has. Those moments are hard to get to, but I’m always trying to put in the conditions where that can happen. Freedom for the actor is one aspect, and like I said, repetition, repetition, repetition! Repeating the scene, then repeating the scene, then repeating the scene again.

JS: The dinner scenes especially are very long. Realistically, how many repetitions were you able to do?

Philippe Lesage: The actors were saying I did 30 takes, which I find a bit enormous, but they’re probably right! We shot the scene from many different angles and then I ended up taking the main shot where you get everything in the frame. Those were the best scenes, but I did try to cover myself. Normally, I don’t cover myself, but I did here. The intensity was all in the wide, long shots. I had many options. We had two days for every dinner scene and we also shot the dinner scenes at the end of shooting. It was a good decision because the actors are completely in character. We had 40 days behind us, everybody knew where they were. We even ended up finishing early and I didn’t need the last day of shooting because, for the last dinner, we got it after three takes. 

JS: When the film was presented at Cinemania, there was some allusion from the producer that the film was difficult to make. Did you feel that was the case?

Philippe Lesage: I mean, it was a challenge on the production level but it’s not of interest to me, because it’s a different reality. For me, it was my best shoot in terms of how I dealt with my own stress. I felt so stressed on my last film, Genesis. It was this kind of cliché where I felt directors need to be so sure of themselves and where they’re going or the team might stop listening to the director. I was afraid I’d lose the crew and if I didn’t know what to do, they’d lose trust in me. It was a totally immature insecurity. 

On this film, I was the complete opposite. I decided before we even started shooting to be completely honest with the crew. I was surrounded by amazing people with no toxic elements. I tried not to freak out if I didn’t know where to put the camera, because sometimes that happens, and then you have a panic attack. I experienced that on Genesis. In this film, if I didn’t know where to put the camera, I’d tell my first AD to give the crew 15 minutes or half an hour to take a break to discuss with my cinematographer Balthazar (Lab). I was being more transparent and not overconfident. It’s stupid to mask everything. I had to accept my flaws and my doubts, and when you work in that way, it actually makes you more comfortable and confident. We shot for 45 days, so sometimes there was a bit of tension, but it was super important for me to solve problems by communicating. It was a challenging shoot, but for me, it was the best. I’m not going to lie about it. I had a fantastic crew and we had an amazing time. Most of them agreed it was the best shoot of their lives. Sometimes something magical happens. 

JS: You shot the film in 2022. That’s almost five years after you would have shot Genesis. What changed to make you decide to shift your approach?

Philippe Lesage: I was very happy with Genesis but I wasn’t very happy about the experience. I was too stressed and I didn’t have a good time. For many people also, I don’t think it was the best shoot of their lives. I wanted to change that and it’s my responsibility as a director. It’s my fault if I’m creating stress. That’s the big thing, I wanted to change my way of dealing with stress because I knew it would have an impact on everybody. I decided it was going to be different and I didn’t have to compromise on any of my terms. We still did a lot of takes! You can still be demanding, that’s not the problem — especially with actors used to working on TV. For them, it can be a real pleasure to work with someone who’s doing 30 takes because we can explore. I’m not making them do redos like a pickup, picking up the same thing 40 times, we’re trying stuff. It’s an experimental laboratory and it’s amazing. It’s the best dimension of what cinema can be. 

JS: When we spoke about Genesis back in 2019, you spoke about how much you loved and how important the editing process was for you. Is that still the case?

Philippe Lesage: I remember. I told you I hated shooting and love editing. Now I love both! I enjoy the writing. I was asked if I would write with somebody else, but that would be very different. Even though I’m a very social person and have a very active social life, I’m also very appreciative of being alone. I travel alone to a lot of festivals. I just came back from Dublin and was in Japan just before that. I was writing the next project with only my interior life as a companion. Then, shooting is a completely other dimension. I like it now, but it’s not like, “I don’t want this to end.” I’m looking forward to the end of shooting but not the end of writing or the end of editing. 

Editing gives me the most pure pleasure. Shooting is more like adrenaline — I don’t sleep and the days go by so fast and it’s so challenging. Then you go back to your hotel room or your little cabin in the woods. Sometimes it’s a day you’re not entirely happy with. It’s a struggle. On this film, there was not a day I wasn’t happy about what we shot, and that was a nice feeling. Still, I like the bubble of editing. I don’t edit myself, I’m always working with Mathieu (Bouchard-Malo), who is like being with a brother. We have a good time. He’s so sensitive, and one of the only people I truly trust. I always say that it’s better to live with your own mistakes than the mistakes of others, but with Mathieu, when he’s pushing for something in the film, I listen to him. 

JS: One thing that struck me about Jeff was that, as part of his journey over the course of the film, it does feel as though he experiences a disillusionment with cinema. Does this mirror how you see the medium at all?

Philippe Lesage: He’s such a neophyte and doesn’t know what he wants to be. He’s 16 years old and wants to make films. But, it’s like, when I was eight years old, I said, “I want to make films,” but it doesn’t mean anything.

JS: But now you are making films!

Philippe Lesage: Yes, but if I put myself in the shoes of the character and I met my filmmaker idol and it turns out this guy wants to destroy me from the inside for no reason, maybe I would question if I was in the right field. It’s more about being disappointed by adults. They’re supposed to be role models, but they aren’t. In the beginning, (Jeff) is so happy when Blake gives him the script with his shooting notes, but then Blake drives him crazy, playing with his mind. 

It’s similar in Genesis, but I didn’t say this in interviews at the time because I thought it was obvious, but (these men) are filled with toxic masculinity. You feel the pressure of the patriarchy trying to squeeze the characters and destroy them. There’s a bit of that here, too. I’m always coming back to this idea. It’s a way for me to say, whatever happens, keep your passions intact even if they try to destroy you. To be honest with yourself is hurtful, but it’s normal and you have to move on.

JS: Who by Fire reminded me a lot of the Pierre Perrault film La bête lumineuse. There is the cabin in the woods, the drinking and all the underlying tension. There’s also that aspect of toxic masculinity that you mention.

Philippe Lesage: There’s a couple of nods to that film and even a quotation, during the (animal)-skinning. The character’s name in La bête lumineuse is Stéphane-Albert and in my film it is just Albert.

JS: When people ask me for recommendations of Quebec films, La bête lumineuse is always one I mention.

Philippe Lesage: Absolutely. When I was teaching film in Denmark, it was the first film I screened to my students.

JS: What did they think of it?

Philippe Lesage: Well, they’re Danish, so they also have a culture of drinking. They could really connect with it. It’s a very interesting film and one I really like. When I first saw it, I was like, who am I going to identify with? When I was younger, I had a job at a school, surrounded by older guys — hockey and football players. I was very skinny and wanted to make films. I was not fitting into their model of masculinity and for the first time of my life, I felt bullied. I was never bullied in school, but then I felt like I had to be tough.

When I first saw the film, it was very painful, because I was identifying with poor Stéphane-Albert because he was the one being mocked. But you know, you can also blame him. It’s very complex, because you’re put in a situation where you’re on his side, but you realize that something is off. He doesn’t read the room. It’s all about himself. He makes himself out to be an unbearable character. There’s a duality between rejecting him and identifying with him. I think that’s why the film hits so hard. 

JS: In a way, he’s rejecting them preemptively. He may be a poet but is perhaps not as sensitive as he thinks.

Philippe Lesage: He’s not understanding of other people and their temperaments at all. He doesn’t get that he’s awkward from beginning to end. That’s another kind of egocentrism. 

JS: A lot of Who by Fire takes place in the woods. We have this idea that nature can be this healing place, but I’m not sure it’s the case here. What are your feelings on nature?

Philippe Lesage: I wasn’t really a guy who liked nature very much before I did this film.

JS: And now you like it?

Philippe Lesage: Well, because there was a pandemic, we did research and scouting for two years. I visited all parts of Quebec, which was very nice, and maybe because of the pandemic, I started to enjoy it. But, I will say, after a week I’m still like, “Let’s go back to the city.” In the film, nature isn’t really an escape, it’s a bit like Solaris. It’s a bit philosophical, in Solaris — you can be on a different planet and on a spaceship, but the ghost from your past will still haunt you.

Nature is important; it has beauty, but it contains a kind of darkness. It’s not like a postcard. We filmed it to be a little scary. Even in the opening scene, there’s menace. Factually, you can go hiking, go off the path to go pee, then you can’t track back and you die in the woods. We will find your body six months later. It’s great, but it’s scary. 

In the opening scene, where Alyosha is discovering the woodmill, we see the hypocrisy. We have beautiful nature, and everything seems beautiful. But, if you look from above, you’re going to see that everything has been destroyed and collected. You can go to the top of a mount in some regions and then you’ll see how much of the forest is being completely destroyed. Nature is there, but humans want to control it. That’s part of the reason I have that scene where Blake, after that last dinner where he’s lost a few feathers, he’s getting weaker and weaker, is like, “Okay, I’m bringing you on an adventure.” His ego is bringing them into a destructive and dangerous situation. There’s this destructive nature that comes from men. But there’s also this idea that even if you go outside, you’re still stuck with your problems. There’s this notion that you can’t just escape. You can’t just control the environment like you’re this great director also trying to direct your life. ■

Who by Fire is now playing in Montreal theatres.

---

For our latest in film and TV, please visit the Film & TV section.