Jordan-Kane Lewis and the Art of the Mini-Feature

One of the benefits of streaming services like Tubi is, they’re not constrained by traditional notions of what constitutes a feature film. While festivals and anthologies do provide an outlet for shorts, they’re not really available to movies of a certain length, in the thirty to seventy minute category. They’re too long for a shorts program, but  a theatrical or even a DVD release is highly unlikely. Tubi to the rescue, offering a way for those awkwardly-sized films to find an audience. Which is fortunate for Jordan-Kane Lewis, since it’s how I saw Nothing Goes, a 53-minute entity, which followed up his similar length (62-minute) feature debut, A Touch of Vengeance.

He operates out of the town of Sheffield, in the North of England. It’s not exactly a traditional cinematic location, being better known for steel-making and – in Film Blitz Towers anyway – eighties bands like Cabaret Voltaire and Heaven 17. Though it has provided a backdrop to some memorable works, including Threads and Four Lions. Lewis recently completed production on his third film, and a fortuitous encounter on Facebook led to him answering some questions about the joy of brevity, the importance of organization, and cinematic ice baths!

Tell us a bit about your background. How did you get into film-making?

My dad and older brother were film buffs. My dad would show me all sorts of films—often foreign, but typically more mainstream ones—whereas my brother would introduce me to everything from horror to Hong Kong action films, I remember a lot of Jet Li films like Unleashed, being a repeat watch! Even exposing me to the exploitative boom of the early 2000s, like Hostel and Saw. Definitely stuff I probably shouldn’t have been watching. But I wouldn’t change it for anything as it’s likely a big part in why I pursued film-making in the first place. When I was younger, I started by making really bad stop-motion animations on an old phone. I also used the family camcorder to shoot little films, mainly so I could mess around with After Effects. Inadvertently, I was teaching myself techniques that I still use today—like masking, keyframing, editing (cutting), and animation. Even back then, I never liked being in front of the camera—I was always obsessed with what was happening behind the scenes.

What triggered your jump from shorts to longer-format work?

Really even when I was shooting shorts I was trying to tell bigger stories so a medium to feature is my Goldilocks zone. Enough time to tell a story which can have multiple layers, meanings and justifications on spending time and resources on. I find short film harder narratively but they are a good way to test out ideas. I typically have used them in the past to test out camera work, narrative elements and check if I could make a film in a particular genre.

Why did you choose to make your first “feature”, A Touch of Vengeance, in black and white?

The original intent for A Touch of Vengeance was for it to be watched on VHS and on a CRT TV. I couldn’t follow through with that, though, as it would have made the film too niche for most people to enjoy. However, I kept some analog elements at the start of the film to hopefully give the same impression someone would get if they found A Touch of Vengeance on VHS back in the late ’90s or early 2000s. I wanted it to feel like a film that, if people stumbled upon it, they’d be pleasantly shocked and surprised by. Black and white allowed me to focus on different aspects of the editing process. That said, I did struggle to find the right balance between too little and too much digital grain.

I used quotes there because what I noticed about A Touch of Vengeance and Nothing Goes is they’re refreshingly terse—barely an hour, or even less for Vengeance. How much of that was a conscious choice?

Vengeance was less deliberate in that sense, but with Nothing Goes, I really focused on pacing in specific parts. As long as a scene hit the right beats and had a bit of rhythm, I was happy to cut it down—removing any pointless sections. Hopefully, the consistent speed gives the film a non-stop energy. My thought process was: if the average audience member is going to give the film a chance, I need to keep them as entertained as possible. Micro- to low-budget films often drag, and when that happens, most people just switch off. The first edit of Nothing Goes was around 70–80 minutes. For the final cut, I was ruthless. We cut about two full scenes—Alex first meeting Lexy after her lesson and Alex in the back of the car on his way to his final resting place—plus trimmed down a few others. Altogether, we shaved off around 15 to 20 minutes.

Nothing Goes was also strikingly bleak. Was that a conscious decision, or how did it come about?

It was definitely a conscious decision with the final scene/sequence being the original initial idea before combining it with a small script, which was the complete opposite genre to the ending I had. I wanted to make a film that was multiple genres—you don’t typically see films switch halfway through. The idea was that, based on the advertising, the typical viewer would expect a Skins-style coming-of-age story. But halfway through, it morphs into a nightmare thriller. It’s also a working-class representation of the perception of university life, contrasted with the harsh reality. It’s a dog-eat-dog world, even in the film industry. Re-entering “reality” after uni can feel brutal. In a way, it’s a kind of Peter Pan story.

What are the biggest lessons you’ve learned since you started?

I believe being organised and giving yourself enough time to plan determines how fast and smoothly a production runs. Nothing Goes is still my most organised shoot—we filmed everything in 15–16 back-to-back days. The whole project took 7 months to finish (from final draft screenplay to final edit), but that was mostly due to budget constraints. Realistically, a lot of the footage could’ve been edited alongside production, and the whole edit process could have been sped up.

Sheffield isn’t exactly Hollywood. What have you found to be the biggest challenge about making movies there?

Sheffield actually offers a lot in terms of locations, so there have been more opportunities than challenges in that respect. The main issue is funding—which is something most filmmakers, no matter where they are, struggle with. It’s the universal film-making problem.

Have you had any amusing experiences while filming?

We shot Nothing Goes in January and went to the beach, so all the water scenes were freezing. Me and Steven Wardle, who plays Peaches, had to swim in the sea for the montage. It was brutal but worth the shot. We needed to shoot in winter, though and create a fake reality to reflect the narrative. It should be cold, but in the moments, they are living this dream before reality hits.

What filmmakers—large or small budget—have inspired your work?

I’ve always tried to do something different when it comes to genre and audience expectations. I wanted to subvert what people thought they were watching—set up a coming-of-age flick in the advertising, then switch the genre halfway through. Two films that really influenced me in that respect were Funny Games and Audition. Both use genre subversion—mixing horror and thriller elements into something else entirely—and they leave a lasting impression. That’s what I want to do, even at a smaller film-making scale. In terms of cinematography, I’ve been heavily inspired by Christopher Doyle and Benoît Debie. Doyle, for his low shutter speeds and wide-angle shots in films like Fallen Angels. Debie, for his use of colour and camera movement in films like Enter the Void and Spring Breakers. With my own style now, I’ve started using rapid camera movements and hyper printing—taking bits of what inspired me and pushing it further to elevate my cinematography.

You recently wrapped production on your vampire feature, All You Do is Bleed. Can you tell us about that project?

Just before production started on Nothing Goes, I wrote All You Do Is Bleed, a vampire film. Once post-production finished on Nothing Goes, I really tried to get that project moving. All You Do is Bleed follows a 16-year-old secondary school student, Zoey, who comes home after being inflicted with vampirism on a school trip—setting in motion a chain of events that forever changes the people around her. The film is non-linear, jumping back and forth around a police investigation into Zoey’s disappearance. It explores Zoey’s life with her dad, James, in a single-parent household. James is always working, trying to keep a roof over their heads, but in doing so, he’s neglecting his kids. Zoey, meanwhile, is trying to figure herself out—rebelling at school, at home, and out with her mates.

That’s all I can say without giving away spoilers!

Where do you want to go next?

I’ve got a few screenplays and features in mind. I wouldn’t mind doing a sci-fi film, something similar to On the Silver Globe. But more realistically, Nothing Goes might be getting a revamp on a much larger scale sooner than the next “different” project.

What advice would you give to other budding filmmakers?

• If you don’t have many filming opportunities, make them yourself! I’ve done it, so I know others can too. But you need to be willing to sacrifice time if you want to make a better film.
• Don’t be afraid to let go of some crew responsibilities, either—the more people involved, the more you can focus on your core role. But above all, networking is key.
• If you want to work in the industry, focus on building connections. A lot of people say you have to work your way up from the bottom, but some of my peers who focused on networking have gotten much further than those who didn’t.

---