What was once understood to be the "finishing phase" — where a film is sent to be polished and prepared for release — has increasingly shifted to a recognition that post-production is a critical creative space where the tone, meaning and identity of a story are actively shaped and defined.

For Alastair Orr, CEO of Post-Production and VFX Studio, The Refinery, the idea that post-production simply "finishes" a film is outdated. Instead, it's about helping that film become what it was always meant to be — a process reflected in his latest collaboration of local film, Variations on a Theme, which transformed from early festival rejection into an award-winning success through post-production refinery.

 

Post-production is often treated as a finishing phase, yet projects like this suggest it's central to storytelling. How would you define its role in the filmmaking process today?

I think the old idea of post as "the place where you fix things" is finally dying, and good riddance. Post is where the film actually becomes itself. You can have a beautifully shot scene that means one thing on the day and something completely different by the time it's been cut, graded, scored and finished.

We're not polishing, we're authoring alongside the Director. The grade is a performance. The sound design is a point of view. The VFX choices are dramaturgical. When we get involved early, the whole film breathes differently because everyone's making decisions knowing what's possible at the back end.


The Refinery works across an end-to-end pipeline — from Grade to VFX to delivery — how does that level of integration open up space for creative risk-taking?

The honest answer is that fragmentation kills bravery. The minute a project is split across four vendors who don't talk to each other, everyone starts protecting their own scope and the creative choices get smaller and safer.

Under one roof, the Colourist can walk down the hall to the VFX Supervisor and say, "I'm pushing this scene cooler, does that break your comp?". That conversation costs nothing and unlocks everything.

Risk is expensive when it's siloed. When it's integrated, risk becomes affordable, which means directors are willing to actually take it.


Does the success of the final version of this film suggest a growing openness to more experimental post-production approaches?

I'd like to think so, but I'd be careful about declaring a trend. What I'd say is that audiences and juries are responding to films that feel committed to a vision, and increasingly that vision is being expressed through choices that used to be considered "post" decisions. Heavy stylisation, unusual colour palettes, sound design that sits forward in the mix, VFX that doesn't try to hide.

Those are no longer seen as gimmicks. They're seen as authorship. So the openness isn't really to experimental post, it's to films that know exactly what they are. Post is just the most visible place where that conviction shows up.

 

This film's shift from festival rejection to major awards followed significant post-production changes. What does that journey reveal about how a film can evolve?

It reveals that a film is never really finished until someone decides it's finished — and even then, you can be wrong. The footage doesn't change. What changes is the interpretation. A re-cut, a regrade, a re-score, a different sound palette, those things can shift a film's emotional centre of gravity completely. I think the lesson, more than anything, is humility.

The first version of a film is rarely the truest version. It's just the first one you had the courage to show. Sometimes a film needs to fail in public before its makers find what it actually wants to be.

 

With the growing use of VFX and digital tools, how is the idea of staying true to the original narrative being redefined in visual storytelling?

Authenticity was never really about whether something was captured in-camera. It's about whether the audience believes the world they're watching. A fully practical film can feel completely fake if the performances don't land. A heavily VFX'd film can feel utterly real if the craft is honest.

What's shifting is that audiences are starting to make peace with the idea that "real" and "true" aren't the same word. A digital sky can carry as much truth as a real one if the filmmakers used it for the right reason. The new authenticity is intentional authenticity, did you make this choice because it served the story, or because you were hiding something?


Do you think the possibility of audiences becoming more visually literate when it comes to recognising post-production techniques changes how stories are crafted?

Yes, and I think it's mostly a good thing. Audiences today can spot a bad comp from a mile away. They know what a LUT looks like. They've seen behind-the-scenes content their whole lives. That literacy raises the floor for everyone, you can't get away with lazy work the way you could fifteen years ago.

But it also means filmmakers can be more transparent. You don't have to pretend the VFX isn't there. Some of the most interesting work right now leans into the artifice rather than hiding it. When the audience is in on the trick, you can do more sophisticated tricks.


As post-production becomes more central to filmmaking, how might that shift our understanding of authorship in filmmaking?

I think the auteur theory is overdue for an update. The Director is still the author, that's not really in question, but the cast of people whose creative decisions shape the final film has expanded. Editors have always been quiet co-authors. Now Colourists, Sound Designers, VFX Supervisors and Finishing Artists are openly part of that conversation.

It doesn't dilute the Director's voice. If anything, it amplifies it, because the director has more collaborators capable of articulating their intent. Authorship isn't a single signature anymore. It's a chord.

In a saturated content landscape, how critical is post-production in helping a film stand out and find its identity?

It's everything, and I don't say that as a salesman. Look at the streaming landscape, there's an unbelievable volume of competently shot, competently performed content. The films and series that cut through almost always have a distinctive post-production fingerprint. A particular grade. A specific approach to sound. A way of using VFX that you recognise within thirty seconds.

That fingerprint is the identity. In a crowded room, the films that get remembered are the ones that look and sound like themselves and nothing else. Post is where that identity is forged. 

 

Did you find this Q&A insightful? Let us know in the comments section below. 

Want to stay up-to-date with the latest news? Subscribe to our newsletter. 

Curious about the behind-the-scenes of local filmmaking? Read From Filming a Scene to Cinema Screen: A Q&A With Annemarie du Plessis.

*Image courtesy of contributor and Canva