關於 speed interview event ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

Interview with A Founder: Conor McLaughlin (Co-founder of 99.co)

By David Wu (AppWorks Associate)

Conor McLaughlin was previously the Co-founder and CTO of 99.co, the real estate marketplace in Singapore and Indonesia. He spent six and a half years at the startup, whose backers include Sequoia Capital, 500 Startups, and Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin, helping to grow it into a $100 million company. As a member of AppWorks Accelerator #21, he is currently working on his next big project, a yet-to-be-named language learning startup.

【What advice do you have for first-time founders?】

First, you need to decide: do I want to run a sprint or a marathon? For a sprint, you may be open to acquisition from the beginning, delay non-startup aspects of your life, give yourself two years where you drop everything to test an idea, choose to raise more money earlier on and thus be more diluted, or do anything else that implies a shorter time horizon. Typically 1-5 years - this can lead to a major boon in a short period of time if executed well. If you decide you are in the sprinting business, you will most likely be pushed toward binary outcomes because of how many investors and employees you have on your cap table. As a first-time founder, you need to be clear with yourself on what you are willing to put on the line. As Reid Hoffman says, it’s like jumping off a cliff and building a plane on the way down… hopefully you build a plane in time.

If you are running a marathon, you are deciding that your competitive advantage is consistency over intensity. You are in this for 10, 15 years. With this time horizon, you will realize you need ways to metabolize stress and maintain emotional, spiritual, and mental health. You need to maintain relationships with friends, family, and romantic partners. When you are looking at this 10 year period, you realize the people around you can only put up with so much. Unfortunately, while work is something people can generally bounce back from, there are many things in life where you cannot - an example is your relationship with your partner. If you’re going to run a marathon, you need to be clear with yourself about what time you have for other aspects of your life and what time you have for your company. Eventually you need to learn what the right speed is where you can run as long as possible. It’s amazing how often it is that those people that keep going, assuming you have chosen the right problem to solve, eventually find daylight. Part of that is just lasting long enough.

Second, you need to revisit and continually ask yourself: should I still be running a sprint or a marathon? Circumstances change. Maybe you sprinted for the first two years to secure interesting results and funding; now it's time to transition to a marathon and clean up the life debt a bit. Or inversely, maybe you're finally leaving the trough of sorrow and it's time to sprint for a bit. Most founders will be in a long distance race with periodic sprinting. From my observation, founders most often stop because of two reasons: They either A) run out of money or B) run out of energy. There’s plenty of advice out there for scenario A (hint: don’t). But in my experience, scenario B is far more pernicious and dangerous to would-be successful founders. If you are in a marathon but fail to pace yourself and run it like one long sprint, you are unlikely to make it to the end.

Much founder advice speaks to this: Don’t let your startup make you fat. Exercise 5-10% of the time. Pick up a hobby outside of your startup. Go home for holidays. All of it leads back to one thing: You need to take care of yourself. Because injury will be far worse for your progress than being a little slower. “Slow is smooth, smooth is fast”, as the US Navy Seals say. This is surprisingly difficult advice for intrinsically motivated founders to follow, because in the event of failure, it makes them vulnerable to the thought, “Well, you didn’t work hard enough.” But for those that already have the hustle, your job is to avoid the moment of epiphany where you look in the mirror and think, “This isn’t worth it.”

All founders will have to sacrifice some things. The point is to not sacrifice everything. It will make you more resilient. Not less. It will give you the space to see situations more objectively and make better decisions. And most importantly, it will let you love what you do because it will remind you that the work isn’t just in service of yourself, it’s in the service of others. I do not think you can judge hard work over a day, or even a year, but I do think you can judge hard work over 5-10 years. Hard work is not just about the next 1-2 months. There will be times when you need to run as fast as possible, but if that is happening all the time you are probably not being smart about the situation. So don’t hurt yourself, be consistent, keep disciplined, and keep going.

Lastly, focus on your metaskills. Public speaking, reading, writing - skills applied in every aspect of your life. Generally what they reflect is learning how to think better. As a founder you need to think about - how can I think more clearly, be more creative, rigorous, analytical? As Warren Buffett and others have said: I have never seen a successful person that did not read as often as they could. Actual books and long form scare a lot of people. That’s your competitive advantage. Read blog posts from smart people, follow smart people on Twitter, listen to podcasts. Always be focused on how you can develop yourself to think better. Fostering the habit of improving your thinking will foster discipline in yourself. And discipline will let you turn that rigorous thinking into action.

【I imagine running the “race” has been especially tough this year. How have you gotten through 2020?】

I have leaned on routine and community. I’ve spent a lot of time trying to foster discipline in myself. I make my bed every morning, meditate every morning, make sure that I go to the gym 3-4 times a week. There’s so much uncertainty in both the world and the entrepreneurial space. Keeping certain things consistent gives me a spine to my life that I can fall back on. If I’m not feeling well, my discipline takes over and I’ll go to the gym. That helps me relieve stress - falling back to routine and having some mainstays of consistency and structure.

And community - it’s been the big mental health zeitgeist of this year. Everyone is recognizing that without the people around us, our mental health diminishes. Joining AppWorks was very intentional so I could surround myself with like-minded people who could question me, hold me accountable, and inspire me. And also just forming personal connections where I felt that I was still taking care of my mental health by connecting with others. Being a founder is an incredibly lonely journey. In the early days, there’s not a lot of people around. Later, when you do hire lots of people, you need to be the boss, the leader - for certain things, you can’t tell the employees everything, and even if you do, there will always be a bit of distance. You need people to relate to - people want to be seen for who they are, and appreciated for what they give. When you are a founder, sometimes it’s hard to feel that you are seen. So I intentionally put myself in situations where I can be inspired, be held accountable, and more importantly connect with others, and feel that I’m not alone. And that me and my co-founders are part of a communal journey with those around us.

【When you talk about how to run the race, I get the sense that you’re drawing from previous experiences and, perhaps, mistakes. What are the mistakes you’ve made in your founder journey and the takeaways?】

I think you could take a calendar, point to a random week, and we could list out all the mistakes from that week (laughs). I do subscribe to Steve Jobs’ philosophy: mistakes will happen, but mistakes happening means we are making decisions. Not making decisions is perhaps the biggest mistake. It’s often the reason for frustration, loss of speed, loss of momentum - so many of the issues you encounter in startups. Not making enough mistakes is probably the #1 mistake that I’ve made.

Second, going back to my advice to first-time founders, is not understanding what game I’m playing. Not understanding that all the money in the world is not going to be worth it if your spouse or partner decides to leave you because you have relegated them to a second-class citizen in your life. I think I forgot that at points. There is more to life than just the company.

Third, be careful about who you choose to work with. At minimum, if you’re doing a standard 8-9 hours at the office five times a week, that’s a lot of time with those people. You want to like the people that you work with - you want to know they’re high integrity, you want to respect their values, and you want to have common values. Choosing the right people that give you energy rather than take it away just makes running the marathon so much easier.

【We welcome all AI, Blockchain, or Southeast Asia founders to join AppWorks Accelerator: https://bit.ly/3r4lLR8 】

📰 今天我們來讀讀【華爾街日報】
🖐🏽 五分鐘來關心國際時事— 美國🇺🇸

📰 Surging Covid-19 Cases in U.S., Other Countries Could Speed Up Vaccine Studies
美國和其他國家激增的2019冠狀病毒疾病個案可能會加速疫苗研究

Subtitle: Pivotal studies depend on subjects being exposed, which is likely to happen faster in places where the virus is spreading rapidly

📌 文章的標題和副標題已概括文章的内容。這篇文章是關於2019冠狀病毒個案和相關疫苗研究，急升的(surging)個案可能會加快(speed up)相關研究。

🖋 subject 在這裡的意思不是「主題」，而是「研究的對象或參與者」。

Surging coronavirus cases in the U.S. and abroad may speed up the race to prove whether experimental vaccines work.

📌 這一段改編敘述 (paraphrase) 標題的重點。

🖋 experimental是來自experiment (實驗) 的形容詞。work 在這裡則是「奏效」的意思。

To demonstrate if a vaccine works, a certain number of study subjects must be exposed to the target virus so researchers can see if significantly fewer vaccinated subjects become sick compared with those who didn’t get the shots.

📌 銜接上一段，說明在什麼情況下，疫苗是奏效的：接種疫苗人士患病率是否遠遠低於沒有接種疫苗人士。

When an outbreak wanes, it can take longer to tell if a vaccine is working. But the recent higher transmission rate for Covid-19 could shave weeks or even months off the timetable for getting final study results to mid- or late-fall, according to Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

📌 這一段進一步解釋，最近2019冠狀病毒個案較高的傳播率(transmission rate) 可以縮短研究的時間，可能幾個星期甚至幾個月(shave weeks or even months off the timetable)。

“No one wants to see people get infected and suffer and even die,” Dr. Fauci said in an interview. “But in fact, if that is occurring, we could get a vaccine answer to efficacy and safety much more quickly if we’re doing it in a situation where there are a lot of infections.”
More than 20 coronavirus vaccines are in human testing, according to the World Health Organization. So far, small, early studies of most advanced vaccines found they were generally safe and triggered immune responses but weren’t designed to prove whether they actually protected people.

📌 這段引述一位專家的意見，儘管我們不願意看到很多的感染個案(infections)，事實上，只有在這種情況下，才可以更快找到一種符合功效(efficacy)及安全(safety)的疫苗。根據世界衛生組織 (the World Health Organization)，有超過20種疫苗正在人體測試。

A series of large, final-stage trials are getting under way that, for the first time, will decisively test whether coronavirus vaccines prevent or reduce risk of Covid-19, including 30,000-person studies for vaccines from Moderna Inc. and from Pfizer Inc. and its partner, BioNTech SE, slated to start by the end of July.

📌 這一段是關於一系列大型的 (large) 最後階段(final-stage) 試驗(trial)。這些試驗果斷地(decisively)測試有關疫苗是否能防止(prevent)或減低 (reduce) 2019冠狀病毒之風險 (risk)。

The new studies will be “event-driven,” which means researchers expect to learn whether the vaccines are working once a certain number of study subjects come down with Covid-19, the disease caused by the new coronavirus.

📌 這一段補充說明，研究員期望從這些參與測試的冠狀病毒患者，能得知疫苗是否奏效。

未完待續...

📰 全文請至
https://reurl.cc/E7k7Ya

📰 作者
Joseph Walker

📰 訂閱請至
https://bit.ly/3j82Q3W

💁🏻‍♂️ 每日多了解一些國際時事，豐富您的世界觀，邊看新聞邊學英語，語言能力更上一層樓！

👇🏻底下點👍 + 留言 + 分享👇🏻

#拓展國際視野來抽世界明信片

🎊上則貼文中獎名單
📮 Rose Chu
📮 Wei Jean
📮 陳柔蓁

(請私訊您的真實姓名 + 電話+地址，之前得過明信片的學員請告知國家，避免重複)
(集滿十張明信片，英語學習書籍送給您！有三位粉絲已達標囉！)
🎁 領獎期限: 08/04 20:00

【水世界】的前製設定與現場劇照

WATERWORLD (1995)
In celebration of today’s anniversary of this wet mess/epic. Let’s celebrate the hard work this crew put into bringing this world to life. Water movies are never easy but when it comes to this movie anytime you bring it up and a crew member from it is in earshot, the stories pour out. Not always bad, I know a AC that said he had a blast, he loved the boat rides out and all the camaraderie the crew had to have to get thru it. To all the crew that helped bring WATERWORLD to life, We salute you and thanks for the memories. I personally enjoy this hot mess of a movie, it’s one of the last ones of its kind...done practically...in a way.
let’s take a deepest of dives into WATERWORLD

The director, Kevin Reynolds, knew there would be problems before production had even started, “During pre-production. Because having never shot on water to that extent before, I didn’t really realise what I was in for. I talked to Spielberg about it because he’d gone to do Jaws, and I remember, he said to me, “Oh, I would never shoot another picture on water”.
“When we were doing the budget for the picture, and the head of the studio, Sid Sheinberg, we were talking about it and I said, “Steven told me that on Jaws the schedule for the picture was 55 days, and they ended up shooting a 155 days”. Because of the water. And he sat there for a moment and he said, “You know, I’m not sure about the days, but I do know they went a hundred percent over budget”. And so, Universal knew the potential problems of shooting on water. It’s monstrous.”
The film began with a projected budget of $100 million which had reportedly increased to $175 million by the end of production. The principle photography had overrun for at least thirty days more than originally planned due to one major decision.

Whereas today they would film in water tanks with partially built sets, employing green screens to fake the locations, back in 1995 they decided to build everything full size and shoot out on the ocean.

This causes extra logistical problems on top of those that already come with making a major action blockbuster. Cast and crew have to be transported to sets. The camera boats and sets float out of position and will have to be reset between takes taking up valuable production time.

The first draft of Waterworld was written by Peter Radar, a Harvard graduate who wanted to break into the film business. His contact in the film industry was Brad Kevoy, an assistant to the legendary director Roger Corman.

Roger Corman is best known for making films very quickly on a small budget. He also liked to give young talent a chance to direct and write their own films. Brad informed Peter that if he could write a Mad Max rip off, he would arrange to finance and let him direct the picture.

Radar came back and pitched the idea for what would become Waterworld. Kevoy took one look at him and said,

“Are you out of your mind? This would cost us three million dollars to make this movie!”
So Radar kept hold of the idea and decided to re-write the script but, this time, going wild. He wrote what he wanted to see on-screen, limited only by his imagination, not a real world production budget.

He managed to get the newly written script shown to a pair of producers with whom he had made contact with. They loved it and ironically they passed it onto Larry Gordon. He shared the enthusiasm saying it had the kind of cinematic possibilities he was looking for. A deal was signed on Christmas Eve of 1989.

As further script rewrites progressed, it became clear that Waterworld was too big for the Larry Gordon’s production company to undertake by themselves. In February 1992, a deal was signed with Universal Pictures to co-produce and co-finance the film. This was now six years after the first draft had been written.

Universal had signed director Kevin Reynolds to Waterworld. Whilst he was finishing his latest film, Rapa Nui, pre-production for Waterworld was already underway.

The decision was taken that the largest set for the film, known as the atoll, would be built full size. The atoll was the primary location for film and in the story served as the location for a small population of survivors.

The logic behind this decision was due to the high percentage of live action filming required in this location, as well as a huge action set piece. No sound stage would be big enough to incorporate this number of scenes and it was crucial that we see the mariner sail his boat into the atoll, turn around and set out again. A full-size construction was the only way to go as the use of miniature and special effects would be impractical.

The next problem was deciding where to build this huge set. After much research, Kawaihae Harbour in Hawaii was chosen as the location. The atoll could be constructed in the harbour and rotated when needed thus allowing for open sea in the background. Later towards the end of principle photography, the atoll could be towed out into the open sea for the filming of the big action sequences which would be impractical to shoot in an enclosed harbour.

Director Kevin Reynolds also discussed the possibility of using the same water tank as James Cameron’s The Abyss, which had filmed there around five years ago,

“We had even entertained the notion of shooting at that big nuclear reactor facility where they had shot The Abyss, to use it for our underwater tank. But we found it in such a state of disrepair that economically it just wasn’t feasible. We didn’t have as much underwater work as they did. Most of The Abyss is interiors and underwater and model work, ours is mostly surface exterior.”

The production company had originally envisioned building the atoll by linking approximately one hundred boats together and building upon this foundation, just like the characters in the film. The production crew set out to search Hawaii and get hold of as many boats as possible.

During this search, a unique boat in Honolulu caught their attention. Upon further investigation, they discovered it was built by Navitech, a subsidiary of the famous aircraft production company, Lockheed.

They approached Lockheed with the strange request of figuring out how they could build the foundations of the atoll. Lockheed found the request unusual but didn’t shy away from the challenging. They agreed to design the atoll foundation and Navitech would construct it.

Meanwhile, an 11ft miniature model of the atoll was sent out to a model ship testing facility in San Diego. Scaled wave tanks are used to determine the effects of the open sea on large scale miniature models of new untested ship designs. This would help determine what would happen with the unusual design of the atoll when it was out of the harbour.

The atoll, when finished, was approximately ¼ mile in circumference. It took three months to construct and is rumoured to cost around $22 million. As the atoll would be used out on the open sea, it required a seafaring license. Nothing like this had been done before and after much deliberation, it was eventually classed as an unmanned vessel. This meant that all cast and crew would have to vacate the set whilst it was towed into position. By the end of production, the atoll was towed out to sea a total of five times.

Shooting out on the open sea presented a series of logistical problem as Reynolds describes,

“We had an entire navy, basically – I mean, this atoll was positioned about a mile off-shore in Hawaii, it was anchored to the bottom of the ocean so it could rotate. What you don’t think about are things like, you’re shooting on this atoll to maintain this notion that there’s no dry land, you always have to shoot out to sea. Away from the land. So we chose a location where we had about a 180 degree view of open water. Nevertheless, any time when you’re shooting, there could be a ship appear in the background, or something like that, and you had to make a choice. Do I hold up the shot, wait for the ship to move out, or do we shoot and say we’re going to incur this additional cost in post-production of trying to remove the ship from the background.

And at that time, CGI was not at the point it is now, it was a bigger deal. And so, even though if you’re shooting across the atoll and you’re shooting out onto open water, when you turn around and do the reverses, for the action, you had to rotate the entire atoll, so that you’re still shooting out to open water. Those are the kinds of things that people don’t realise.

Or something as simple as – if you’re shooting a scene between two boats, and you’re trying to shoot The Mariner on his craft, another boat or whatever, you’ve got a camera boat shooting his boat, and then the other boat in the background. Well, when you’re on open water things tend to drift apart. So you have to send lines down from each of those boats to the bottom, to anchor them so that they somewhat stay in frame. When you’ve got a simple shot on land, you set up the camera position, you put people in front of the camera and then you put background in there. But when you’re on water, everything’s constantly moving apart, drifting apart, so you have to try to hold things down somewhat.

And these are simple things that you don’t really realise when you’re looking at it on film. But logistically, it’s crazy. And each day you shoot on the atoll with all those extras, we had to transport those people from dry land out to the location and so you’re getting hundreds of people through wardrobe and everything, and you’re putting them on boats, transporting them out to the atoll, and trying to get everybody in position to do a shot. And then when you break for lunch, you have to put everybody on boats and take them back in to feed them.”

The final size of the atoll was determined by the size of the Mariners boat, the trimaran. The dimensions for the trimaran were finalised very early on in pre-production, allowing all other vehicles and sets to be sized accordingly.

Production required two trimarans boats which are so called because they have three hulls. The first was based on the standard trimaran blueprint and built for speed but also had to accommodate a secret crew below decks.

During wide and aerial shots it would have to look like Costner himself was piloting the boat. In reality, a trained crew could monitor and perform the real sailing of the boat utilising specially built controls and television monitors below deck.

The second trimaran was the trawler boat which could transform into the racer through the use of special practical effects rigs. Both of these boats were constructed in France by Jeanneau. Normally this type of vessel requires a year to construct but production needed two boats in five months!

Normally once the boat had been constructed, Jeammeau would deliver it on the deck of a freighter, requiring a delivery time of around a month. This delay was unacceptable and so the trimarans were dismantled into sections and taken by a 747 air freighter to the dock Hawaii. Upon arrival, a further month was required to reassemble the boat and get them prepared for filming.

sets recreating the inside of the tanker were built using forced perspective in a huge 1000ft long warehouse which had an adjoining 2000ft field. In this field, they built the set of the oil tankers deck, again constructed using forced perspective. Using the forced perspective trick, the 500ft long set could be constructed to give the impression that it was really twice as long.

There’s more to a film than just it’s sets and filming locations. Over two thousand costumes had to be created with many of the lead actors costumes being replicated many times over due to wear and tear.

This is not an uncommon practice for film production, but due to the unique look of the people and the world they inhabit, it did create some headaches. One costume was created with so many fish scales the wardrobe department had to search the entire island of Hawaii looking for anyone who could supply in the huge quantity required.

Makeup had to use waterproof cosmetics, especially on the stunt players. As everyone had a sun burnt look, a three-sided tanning booth was setup. The extras numbering in their hundreds, with ages ranging from six to sixty-five, passed through the booth like a production line to receive their spray tan. The extras then moved onto costume before finally having their hair fixed and becoming ready for the day.

In some scenes, extras were actually painted plywood cutouts to help enhance the number of extras on the set. This can easily be seen in one particular shot on board the Deez super tanker.

Filming on the water is not only a difficult and time-consuming process but also very dangerous. It’s been reported that Jeanne Tripplehorn and Tina Majorino nearly drowned on their first day of filming.

Waterworld’s star Kevin Costner reported having a near-death experience when filming a scene in which the mariner ties himself to his catamaran to survive a storm. The pounding water caused him to black out and nearly drown.

Unbeknownst to most of the crew, Kevin Costner’s stunt double was riding his jet ski across 40 miles of open ocean between his home on Maui and the film’s set on the Big Island. When he didn’t show up for work one day, the production team phoned his wife, who informed them he had already left for work. The stunt double’s jet ski had run out of gas halfway through his “commute” and a storm had swept him farther out to sea. It took a helicopter most of the day to find him. The stunt doubles name was Laird Hamilton.

As well as the logistical problems of creating a film of this scale and on water, they also had to deal with the press who seemed intent on wanting the film to fail. Director Kevin Reynolds discusses the situation,

“It was huge, we were constantly fighting – people wanted to have bad press. That was more exciting to them than the good news. I guess the most egregious example of that that I recall was that the publicist told me that one day…we’d been out the day before and we were doing a shot where we sent two cameras up on a mast of the trimaran and we wanted to do a shot where they tilled down from the horizon down to the deck below. We’re out there, we’re anchored, we’re setting the shot up and a swell comes in, and I look over and the mast is sort of bending.

And I turned to the boatmaster and I said, “Bruno, is this safe?”. And he looks up the mast and he goes, “No”. So I said, “Okay, well, we have to get out as I can’t have two guys fall off from 40 feet up”. So, we had to break out of the set-up, and go back in a shoot something else and we lost another half-day.

Anyway, the next day the publicist is sitting in his office and he gets this call from some journalist in the States and he goes, “Okay. Don’t lie to me – I’ve had this confirmed from two different people. I want the facts, and I want to hear about the accident yesterday, we had two cameramen fall off the mast and were killed”.

And, he goes, “What are you talking about?”. And he goes, “Don’t lie to me, don’t cover this up, we know this has happened”. It didn’t happen! People were so hungry for bad news because it was much more exciting than…they just said it, and you know, it hurt us.”
Upon release, the press seemed to be disappointed that the film wasn’t the massive failure they were hoping it to be. Universal Studios told Kevin Reynolds that one critic came out of an early screening in New York and in a disappointed tone said,

“Well, it didn’t suck.”

It is true that during principle photography the slave colony set sank and had to be retrieved. However due to bad press, the rumour became much bigger and to this day when you mention the sinking set, most people assume it was the huge atoll.

During production, press nicknamed the film “Kevin’s Gate” and “Fishtar”, referring to 1980’s box office failures Heaven’s Gate and Ishtar. Heaven’s Gate failed so badly it led to the sale of United Artists Studio and has become synonymous with failure in Hollywood.

As well as the exaggerated set problems and other various production rumours, there were also difficulties with the script. In a risky move, the film was green lit and moved into production without a finalised script.

The final total is a reportedly thirty-six rewrites. One of the writers involved was Joss Whedon. Joss had worked on many scripts before becoming a director having being at the helm of both The Avengers and the sequel Avengers: Age Of Ultron. He described his experience on Waterworld as,

“Seven weeks of hell”
Everything came to a head just three weeks before the end of principle photography. Kevin Reynolds who was an old friend of Kevin Costner allegedly walked off set or was fired. There was no official statement on what happened.

When Reynolds left the production this event caused many changes to be made. Composer Mark Isham had already composed approximately two-thirds of the film’s score by the time Reynolds left and that event ultimately caused him to leave production. As Mark describes in this interview excerpt,

“Kevin Reynolds quit the film, which left me working for Kevin Costner, who listened to what I had written and wanted a completely different point of view. He basically made a completely different film — he re-cut the entire film, and in his meeting with me he expressed that he wanted a completely different approach to the score. And I said, “oh let me demonstrate that I can give that to you”, so I presented him with a demo of my approach to his approach, and he rejected that and fired me. What I find a lot in these big films, because the production schedules are so insane, that the directors have very little time to actually concentrate on the music.”
Rumours report that Costner took control of production. He directed the last few weeks of principle photography and edited the final cut of the film that was released in cinemas.

Reynolds discusses his surprise at discovering that one of the most famous scenes from what is known as the extended version, was left on the cutting room floor,

“…it would have differed from what you saw on the screen to some extent, and one of the things I’ve always been perplexed by in the version that was released, theatrically, although subsequently the longer version included it, and the reason that I did the film, was that at the very end of the picture, at the very end of the script, there’s a scene when they finally reach dry land and The Mariner’s sailing off and he leaves the two women behind, and in the script they’re standing up on this high point and they’re watching him sail away, and the little girl stumbles on something.
And they look down and clear the grass away and that’s this plaque. And it says, “Here, near this spot, 1953, Tenzing Norgay and Edmund Hillary first set foot on the summit of Everest”. And that was in script and I was like, “Oh, of course! Wow, the highest point on the planet! That would have been dry land!”. And we got it! We shot that. And they left it out of the picture. And I’m like, “Whaaat?!”. It’s like the Statue of Liberty moment in Planet of the Apes. And I was like, “Why would you leave that out?”

Written by John Abbitt | Follow John on twitter @UKFilmNerd

If any the crew cares to share any of their experiences on it please comment.
Thanks for reading
If you want more deep dives visit
https://www.facebook.com/groups/crewstories/?ref=share