On the research before turning the cameras on

The research process is always really important in setting the film that you’re making up for success. We had several months of research in pre-production before we ever turned the first camera on. It was really about finding the right locations, finding the right people to work with, like the guides that had the expertise in the different areas and with the different animals that we wanted to film. A lot of our boat captains and guides were First Nations and knew the area better than anyone else… they knew where the otters like to go. So tapping into that deep understanding of the environment was incredibly helpful. 

But we didn’t have a back-up wolf family! Once we chose our characters, we kind of just stuck with them. And we didn’t really know how it was going to turn out. For the marmot storyline that I worked on a lot, we had that one group of marmots [that had been released into the wild] — those five marmots, and that was it. We weren’t following another group to see how their journey would play out. We were able to plan in terms of picking the right place to be, but in terms of sort of how the story would play out, it was just full of surprises for us.

On the camera techniques they used

There was a lot of tech that made these ambitious visual goals that we had for the series possible. Remote cameras were a huge part of that — that was something we used for multiple different storylines. We used remote cameras with marmot dens. We used them around the sea wolf den. All of the material of the mother sea wolves around the den with their pups was entirely 100 per cent remote. So we never had someone actually there on the ground because it was such a sensitive site. Also, with the sea otters, we used lots of remote cameras to get really unique angles and would leave them running all day. And you’d be scrubbing through excitedly, in the evenings, to see: “What did we get? What did we get?” It was like Christmas. You’re just so excited getting one of those remote cameras back. And I think for just wildlife filmmaking in general, they’re a game changer: the technology is getting so much better, the battery life and all that stuff, so it allows you to do pretty unique things.

On the decision to give the animals nicknames

I think, naming the animals, it does make it more accessible to an audience in a way. You relate to them and you feel that sense of who they are as an individual. We really wanted to take the audience on that sort of emotional journey and show them how amazing and unpredictable [their lives are] and all the trials and tribulations that these animals have to go through. But I also think it’s just something that we naturally start to do in the field. When you’re spending lots of time with these animals, you don’t kind of refer to them as like “wolf number three” or “old male” you know: it’s just very natural, as you get to know them as individuals, to give them nicknames. It’s the same with the researchers that we worked with for the marmots. It becomes a nice shorthand for knowing who you’re talking about. We never wanted to anthropomorphize or give human emotions, but I think to just acknowledge that these are individuals. They go through a lot of things just like we do in terms of finding a mate and raising their young ones, dealing with unexpected struggles and trying to do their best.

On finding a balance between the science and storytelling, the humour and the tragedy

We let the content itself guide us in a way. Sometimes things happen that are just really funny. Animals trip and fall over, or they have a funny, awkward moment. It’s not all sort of serious nature, tooth and claw drama. There’s lots of points in the animals’ lives that are very tender and very sweet or kind of silly. And so I think, first and foremost, it was just letting the stories themselves guide us through the lighter moments and also the sadder moments — like when one of the eagle chicks passed away during the heat dome, there’s definitely those sad things that happened that we couldn’t have predicted. We wanted to honour those moments, but also include some of the lighter moments. That was the balance we were trying to strike. And I think Will’s voice was kind of perfect for that as a narrator because he’s great at delivering the lines that have the humor to really make you laugh. But he also has a lot of heart. And I think he was able to tell parts of the stories that were sadder and more serious. Hopefully we’re able to do justice to the light and the shade.