"Off and Running" Opening Weekend Q&A - Jan. 30, 2010

“Off and Running”

Opening Weekend Theatrical Release

Q&A after 4:05pm screening with Director Nicole Opper and others

January 30, 2010

IFC Center

New York, NY

(L to R: Rita Taddonio, Nicole Opper & Sharese Bullock. Photo by Brian Geldin.)

It has been over a year since Nicole Opper’s documentary “Off and Running" was brought to my attention. I had first learned of it through DocuClub, where Opper screened a work-in-progress version, but I couldn’t make it to that screening. A few months later, I was excited to learn that it would premiere at the Tribeca Film Festival, but because of my own publicist duties on another film, Danae Elon’s “Partly Private” (which also coincidentally showed a work-in-progress at DocuClub) that was premiering there, my schedule was full, and therefore I missed “Off and Running” again. Now with the theatrical release of the film at IFC Center this week, I finally got my chance to watch this wonderful film. I asked Opper after the screening how much her film had changed since she screened her rough cut at DocuClub. She told me that the changes were pretty radical. “Being there that evening felt a little messy, loud and complicated,” she said. Fernanda Rossi was the moderator asking a lot of questions asking for their vote, which was split 50/50.  Where it became really useful for Opper was when people would call or write to her independently with notes and feedback, which was worked into future cuts. There were entire scenes that were cut and the chronology changed quite a bit, focusing it more with Avery’s voiceover. And by the way, Opper's new fantastic boots she wore to the screening yesterday only cost $50, marked down from $165. I love it when filmmakers reveal these things, ie. “Burma VJ” co-editor Thomas Papapetros’ reason for the film’s lucky winning streak as revealed to me after this year’s Cinema Eye Honors…Keep’em coming :)

In "Off and Running," Opper shows a complex and layered story of Avery, an African-American high school student and track & field champion in Brooklyn, adopted by two white Jewish lesbian moms with two other adopted multi-ethnic brothers. Avery seems to have a very happy life, but wants to meet her biological mother. When she finally discovers her roots, her attempts to reach out to her birth mother don't go as planned, and Opper sensitively shows Avery's heartbreak and struggle as she comes of age.

The Q&A with Opper along with producer Sharese Bullock was moderated by Rita Taddonio, Director of Spence-Chapin's Adoption Resource Center, one of the many organizations that "Off and Running" has teamed up with to bring awareness of adoption.  Avery, who was at a track meet that day, couldn’t make it to the Q&A, but was there at the sold-out Opening Night screening the night before. Before asking questions, Taddanio said the reason she loved the film is that it shows how a group of people who aren’t biologically related can be a family, being bonded by love and commitment, growing pains, laughter and sadness and have that intimate relationship that makes a family. It was also realistic to her in its portrayal of struggle for identity and showing other people’s stories, not just Avery’s, but her brother and her friends, too. She added that those who are adopted cannot be classified, as some people search for their biological families, and some do not.  Some who search have a great reunion, and some are disappointed. Some relationships are rocky, and others are great. Every adoptee she knows wants to know information on where they came from.

Taddonio’s first question to Opper was, what made her choose this topic and what challenges, if any, were there in making the film? Opper said she didn’t begin with the topic of adoption. When she met Avery a few years earlier, she was teaching a class in filmmaking that Avery was in. They had talked a lot, and she was struck by Avery’s charisma and willingness to open up. Bullock answered, saying that working around a 16-year-old’s schedule that every parent of a teenager can understand is keeping up with the changes. One of the incidental changes was how Avery’s hair kept changing, which was a challenge in the editing process, but more seriously, a bigger challenge as a producer was sticking to the collaboration in the toughest times listening to some really painful moments for everybody involved, sitting inside and outside of that experience.  “We think it’s challenging, but it’s her (Avery’s) life,” Bullock said.

From the audience, the questions of what the timeframe of shooting was, and what exactly did Opper envision the story would become, were asked. Opper said she filmed Avery from the ages of 16 through 19, and she was surprised at every turn. When she began filming, she saw that things weren’t all peachy and they talked a lot. At the same time, she was just getting to know about Avery’s family background. In the beginning, she saw a portrait of a multi-ethnic family and didn’t quite know what the conflict would be, but she imagined that it would be about the discrimination they would face as a family, but that didn’t become the focus.  It turned into something more complicated.

In the film, there’s a long stretch of time between filming where we don’t see some of Avery's personal struggles and isolation, so a question posed by someone in the audience was, what happened to Avery during that time? Bullock said they relied on their practice as media educators, and not just filmmakers, to tell Avery’s story and to be aware of all boundaries and sensitivities. While Avery wasn’t there at this screening to speak for herself, Bullock said that Avery has said in many screenings before that her involvement in the project is part of her development. This journey of telling her story is part of getting through those tougher times. The question for any teenager coming of age is, how does the filmmaker play the support role, but also respect the journey? Opper added that while they didn’t film during that break, she had been in touch with Avery by phone every once in a while, and Avery also had a huge support network from her friends to her track team members and others.

Taddanio asked if they could elaborate on what some of things that might have got Avery through her journey? Bullock said it was due in fact to Opper’s existing relationship with Avery, because she was her teacher first before she documented her life, and there was a trust. Avery’s vulnerability and sense of self unfolded for all of them.

The final question that was more of a comment and opinion rather than a question raised by a man in the audience that caused a bit of a stir from the rest of the audience. He said he was troubled with the issue of privacy, and how could Avery who was only a teenager at the time, give her consent to allow them to intrude on her intimate family life? Doesn’t this present an ethical question, he asked. Opper said it was a conversation she had with Avery all the time, because it mattered deeply to her. Bullock said she appreciated this man’s comments and his point of view, but from their perspective as filmmakers as well as Avery and her family, this film was made to help other families like their own.  The audience clapped. “That’s the greater value of this opportunity,” Bullock said. Taddanio added that this is a very thoughtful film and there are a lot of courageous people out there who are willing to tell their stories so younger adopted people who are going through this search for identity will be able to discuss it. “We’re grateful to you and to the family and their courage,” Taddonio said.

“Off & Running” continues to play at IFC Center throughout the rest of this week, and is slated to air on the PBS Series, “POV” later this year.

Stranger Than Fiction - "Running Fence" - January 19, 2010

“Running Fence”

Stranger Than Fiction

January 19, 2010

IFC Center

New York, NY

Stranger Than Fiction's Thom Powers and "Running Fence" co-director Albert Maysles. Photo by Brian Geldin.

Fresh off last week’s Cinema Eye Honors, Thom Powers presented this week at Stranger Than Fiction David and Albert Maysles’ and Charlotte Zwerin’s 1978 documentary “Running Fence.” Albert Maysles, who was also at last week’s Cinema Eye Honors presenting an award, appeared at Stranger Than Fiction Tuesday night to speak after the screening of “Running Fence,” which was a beautiful portrait of artists Christo’s and the late Jeanne-Claude's white 
nylon fabric that stretched along 24 ½ miles of the California Pacific coastline that, like their last project The Gates in New York City, was originally met with opposition and skepticism by residents and local government, but their persistence paid off, and their art was displayed and gorgeously filmed by the legendary Maysles brothers.

Before asking questions, Powers noted how he saw in the credits the names of people who are doing such great work such as Robert Kenner (Food, Inc.) and Bruce Sinofsky (Brother’s Keeper). Maysles said he could understand why they’re making such good movies and while just watching again “Running Fence” on the screen there at Stranger Than Fiction, it reminded him why it is that he keeps doing it. “I’m 82 years old and I got 10 or 12 projects that I’d like to get going,” Maysles said. He recognizes the importance that so much is missing in mass media – “good people, doing good things…documentary has the power to capture that very directly, very deeply, and very truthfully.”

Thom’s first question to Maysles was, what his and his brother David’s origins were with Christo and Jeanne-Claude (as “Running Fence” was just one of many collaborations together). Maysles said around 1962 or '63 when he and his brother were making documentaries in France, they were doing something different by filming with cameras that didn’t need a tripod. It was a whole new thing called “direct cinema.” The French government invited them to Lyon where they met a guy who was designing a new camera, who they brought to Paris with them to show their first film, “Showman.” The guy brought two people along, Christo and Jeanne-Claude. “They were not just people working with a canvas, but they were out in the real world where art was made up of what’s actually going on,” Maysles said. It was perfect subject matter for the Maysles’ films. It did take a while for a film project to come along. Their first project together would be “Valley Curtain.”

Powers asked Maysles while watching the film again that night; did he have any memories of that period? Maysles said he thinks back to the words of Spinoza who said "All things excellent are as difficult as they are rare," which describes the nature of this project. He also was thinking about David (who passed away in 1987) and Jeanne-Claude (who passed away last November). “They’re gone, but there they are on the screen,” he said.

While watching Albert’s (and Antonio Ferrera’s) more recent film, “The Gates,” which is the only Christo and Jeanne-Claude project he’s seen in person, it had almost more meaning to him watching it on film than seeing The Gates in person. Maysles said, “That’s the strength of documentary,” Maysles said. “If the camerawork is good, it sees more than you would as a normal person. The viewer is given a better position to know what took place than having been there.” (For my 2007 film review and notes from the Antonio Ferrera Q&A at Silverdocs, go here.)

In visualizing “Running Fence,” how were they thinking through how to film it, Powers asked. Were they being conscious about their approach or more instinctive? Maysles said that each moment was instinctive. There was always something to be filmed, and a lot that shouldn’t be either, but they wanted to make sure they got the essentials.

A question from the audience to Maysles was where did they get the money to fund their film projects? “I don’t remember,” Maysles answered, generating a laugh from the audience. He remembered that some of his films like “Salesman” and “Grey Gardens” they paid for all by themselves. Powers interjected, asking if in the 1970s, they supplemented their films by making television commercials. “Thank g-d we don’t do that anymore,” Maysles replied. But it would have been tough without going with that income. He said he’d love to do another commercial someday if they allowed him to do them the way he likes to do them. He said he has an idea for a commercial for Kleenex where he’d go to a hospital where a woman is about to give birth. He’d start filming the moment the infant is being handed over to the mother. “It’s got to be a moment where there’s tears on her cheeks and she reaches for a Kleenex,” he said. Powers joked, “We may be able to arrange that.” (Referring to his expecting wife Raphaela sitting nearby).

Another member of the audience asked Maysles if he could clarify what he meant earlier as to which moments shouldn’t be filmed. Maysles said that he’s been making a film ("In Transit") about people that he meets on trains where there’s a story about to happen when they get off the train. (Maysles previously discussed this same scenario in some notes I took in 2007 when he spoke at BAM). He was about to film this woman who had a difficult story of a child that she couldn’t come to tell and be identified. He had to get it without offending her, so he filmed her hands. On the other hand, he said it’s so important not to go in the other direction and be so careful that you don’t get much value. It’s a matter of good taste and respect. He’s found over the years he’s filmed people with their vulnerabilities just as well as things that are positive traits done with love and understanding.

On being asked how he’s able to seem so invisible behind the camera while shooting his films, Maysles said that he’s been asked many times how he gets so close to the hearts and minds of the people he’s filming. “It’s because I have my heart and mind with them,” he said. His mother used to tell him that there’s good in everybody. With documentaries, that bridge can be gapped with good material that goes directly to the experience that people are having.

Lastly, Maysles talked about his Maysles Film Institute in Harlem. He said his original purpose to have it in Harlem was so that his four children would have enough space to have their own apartments and all be in the same neighborhood. One of the three buildings they were in houses the film company and a 60-seat movie theater. Unlike anywhere else in New York, they exclusively show documentaries. They also teach kids in the neighborhood how to make their own films. He added that only a few weeks earlier the most exciting moment in his life occurred when the kids showed their films to an audience and during the Q&A, one of the questions to them was if any of them are planning to make a career out of filmmaking, and everyone of them raised their hand.

Stranger Than Fiction - "Snowblind" - January 12, 2010

“Snowblind”

Stranger Than Fiction

January 12, 2010

IFC Center

New York, NY

Stranger Than Fiction's Thom Powers and "Snowblind" Director Vikram Jayanti. Photo by Brian Geldin.

 Tuesday saw the official opening of the new season of Stranger Than Fiction with an appropriately snowy-titled screening of Vikram Jayanti’s ("Game Over - Kasparov and the Machine") “Snowblind,” which Thom Powers noted during the post-screening Q&A was their most controversial film yet. Reason being, he received protests via email from animal rights advocates about the content of the film, that being the racing of dogs in Alaska’s famous 1,000-mile-plus dog sledding race, the Iditarod. But the protests didn’t stop Powers from showing the film on Tuesday. In fact, he told me when the film premiered at the Toronto Film Festival last year, he received no protests at all. In “Snowblind,” Jayanti takes us on the incredible journey of 23-year-old Rachel Scdoris of Oregon, who is legally blind, and is preparing to go on her third Itidarod. When she finally embarks on her sled with her dogs across the bleak Alaskan wilderness, what ensues is a remarkable and dramatic narrative. We see Rachel as a perky young woman with spirit and determination, despite her disability, which never seems to hinder her. She does get help along the way with another “musher” named Joe, who according to the race’s rules, must go with her just to lead her, but can never physically help her, and she doesn’t ever really seem to need it, except perhaps when her dogs get stuck. With not only patience, but also love, Rachel gets through any obstacle, but it gets harder and harder along the way, and the film successfully ensnares us in its suspense. There are so many twists and turns and highs and lows in the film, none of which I will reveal here, because you will just have to discover them on your own when and if you get a chance to see it yourself. Therefore, any discussion of these particular plateaus in the film that were discussed during the Q&A have been purposely left out of my notes below, which highlight more of the inner workings of the production and psychology behind the characters and director’s choices.

Powers began by asking Jayanti what got him involved with wanting to make this film, and what was it like working in these extreme conditions? Jokingly, Jayanti replied that he’d seen "March of the Penguins" and "Grizzly Man" and “if crazy Werner could do it, I could add to my muster if I do it in mid-winter.” He said the amazing thing about shooting in the cold weather, the camera’s batteries would drain in about three minutes, so they all had to carry spare batteries inside their clothing. They had enough money to do a rehearsal trip the year before the actual shoot. He wanted to find out what it would be like. Walking around in the snow in  minus 45-degree weather, they would get really tired, really quickly, and thought to lie down for a minute…“and that’s how you die.”  They worked out really quickly that they should always stand at the side of each other, never being out of site. The whole experience to him seemed sort of spiritual, and they always felt the claw of death coming up from underneath the snow.

Powers then explained that “Snowblind” turned out to be the most controversial film that Stranger Than Fiction has ever shown, because he’d been receiving emails everyday from people who are against the Iditarod. Had Jayanti and Rachel also experienced some of this? Jayanti said he remembered that someone in Oregon came over to check all 105 of Rachel’s dogs and told him that it’s amazing that these dogs could live to be about 19 and 20 years old, where most people’s pet dogs only till about eight. Jayanti said he doesn’t have a particular opinion about the rights and wrongs of mushing, but he said the dogs do seem to live longer and love running. “I don’t know whether to judge it or not,” he said.

Jayanti said Rachel is a very private person and he had less luck getting inside of her than the other people who work with her. He began thinking the reason she did the Iditarod was so she can get as far away from people as she possibly can.

Powers asked Jayanti about his thoughts on Rachel’s relationship in the film with her father. “I get sued a lot when I make a film,” Jayanti replied, so he confined himself to saying that in a universal position, all adolescents at the cusp in believing that their father is a “g-d and a dick,” he thinks it was very difficult for her to become fully independent. He said she’s 23 and he really shouldn’t call her an adolescent, but in many ways because of her disability, has kept her adolescent, therefore it was a difficult relationship. He does know for a fact that the minute she made enough money from endorsements after her first Iditarod, she built a house on the huge lot that they live on in a trailer and put her father in the house and she stayed in the trailer.

A question from the audience was if Rachel has any relationships outside of her own family, to which Jayanti said that she has a bunch of friends in Oregon, but he doesn’t know if she has a romantic relationship. He doesn’t really go too deeply into people’s personal lives. He’s more interested in their public lives. She attracts a lot of attention, so she meets a lot of people and is really charming and lovely, and you also get to see her at her worst during certain moments [which I won’t reveal] during the race.

Given her privacy, what has been Rachel’s reaction to the film, Powers asked. Jayanti said he thinks she is too professional to tell him what she really thinks. He suspects that she may think that he was unfair about the dogs. It was her father’s idea that maybe she should mix English Pointers with Huskies, which she kind of sticks with, but almost no one else in mushing does that anymore. He thinks she feels he was unfair about the role that the dog breeding played.

Powers said it was an interesting dynamic in the film the interviews Jayanti ask Rachel along the race. Was that something he imagined from the beginning would be a component or did it just come out that way? Jayanti said he went into doing this film with the fantasy that she had this tremendous darkness inside of her that she could only exorcize in the great wilds of Alaska, and when you bring in any pre-conceived fantasy in the making of a film, you’re always going to be wrong. For a long time, he was always sort of trying to crack her open to admit that it was hell being blindish and being caught between her father and hell by being hated by so many people in the mushing community because they feel she’s a danger to other mushers. He thought she would give it up. He thought this would be a very interesting dog film to make. She resisted that for a long time, so he kept pushing. He realized that she was not going to give it up, and he was chasing the wrong story. He’d completely forgotten that she was doing the most incredible things. A lot of the stuff he pushed, he regrets. He cut a first version of the film, which was much darker and realized that the film didn’t like her at all, so he took a couple of months off and he came back to re-cut it to get back in some sense of admiration and affection for her. He did want her to step outside the zone of denial and admit that this fantasy she had of winning the race was not a real fantasy and unrealistic.

From the audience, someone asked Jayanti if he’s given much thought to using the film as a teaching tool and to raise awareness of disabilities. He said that Rachel herself does a lot of work and speaks to high schools, and he hopes his film can become a part of that. He said this is the first time in a long time that he doesn’t own the film, Discovery owns it. He suspects that they will be far more reticent about distributing it, because he imagines they’ll be far more pressured then Powers was from the animal rights community.

Stranger Than Fiction: "Upstream Battle" - Jan. 13, 2009

Stranger Than Fiction
Upstream Battle
Q&A with director Ben Kempas
IFC Center
New York, NY
January 13, 2008

(Upstream Battle director Ben Kampas and STF's Thom Powers)

Tuesday night was the first screening of 2009 and new season of Stranger Than Fiction at the IFC Center. It’s been since last spring that I last reported from STF. Upstream Battle is story of the battle over the use of the Klamath River, where Pacific salmon have swum up to their spawning grounds and the people of four Native American tribes there (the Hoopa Valley, Yurok, Karuk and Klamath) struggle against a multinational corporation (PacifiCorp) that threatens this beautiful and natural phenomena. Director Ben Kempas (and co-host of D-Word) does an excellent job telling all sides of this open-ended story. “It was important to me that you get to know all these various parties that are involved and then make up your own mind,” Kempas said during the Q&A. Below are highlights from the rest of the discussion led by STF’s Thom Powers.

Powers: How did you get connected with the tribes?

Kempas: I have a good friend who does environmental PR work…He got asked by these tribes from North America to help them reach the British media while they were about to confront Scottish Power at their annual general meeting. I heard that and it instantly sounded like this David and Goliath-like story. I went with it and met these people and instantly connected with them and it kept me busy for the next three years.

Powers: When approaching a story dealing with Native Americans, you’re approaching a story dealing with layers of history, an indigenous culture that’s not even that well-known in our own country. What were the things you had to go through to get yourself into that world? What were the challenges?

Kempas: Just listen…I met them in Scotland and they invited me over…at the time of their annual renewal ceremony, which you actually don’t get to see in the film because it’s so sacred that you shall not take any pictures of it…That was there most important time of the year that they shared with us. We got to know all the people before we even got our camera…I think that was part of the getting access thing. Of course the corporation was much more difficult to than the tribes.

Powers: How was that negotiated? How skeptical of you were they and given you had spent so much time with the tribes…what was it like for you to open yourselves to the other point of view?

Kempas: I just focused on what I was interested on. There’s so many more parties in the basin that are involved in these settlements…there’s environmental organizations, there’s all the government agencies…I really just wanted to focus on the tribes mostly because I coming from Germany didn’t have a clue about Native Americans at the time. There was so much to be said about their culture, other than there all drug-addicted and that they run casinos now, all these kind of media clichés. The corporation…was interested in references, they wanted to see previous films. They actually wanted contacts of protagonists in previous films so they could inquire if they had been treated fairly…Also at the time, they were in a transition period where they already knew that they were going to be sold to Warren Buffett, but they still had to report to their bosses in Scotland (who) didn’t have a problem to say yes to this documentary, because they knew they would be getting rid of the company soon anyway….David Kvamme, the spokesman over at PacifiCorp, who you briefly see in the film, he does corporate videos for the company and considers himself a filmmaker as well, so I think he just wanted to support me in that way.

Powers: Has he commented on the finished film?

Kempas: They’ve regretted that we didn’t put in some footage of a dam that he showed us on the other river that they actually agreed to having removed as an example…We had it in the film for a long time, but then people got too confused because it seemed like they were going to remove a dam on the Klamath River…Toby (Freeman, the relicensing manager for PacifiCorp) liked the film. Toby would have like to come to Toronto but at the time that these confidential settlement negotiations were at such a delicate stage they felt they couldn’t do that. I know the film has gone quite high up in the corporate ladder. The CEOs of PacifiCorp and MidAmerican, their parent company, have seen it. Somebody told me that they wouldn’t be surprised if it had gone all the way up to Warren Buffett.

Powers: There’s an agreement now to remove the dams theoretically. Are the stakeholders in this optimistic that’s going to happen? What do they see as other challenges making that happen?

Kempas: The next big challenge is to get Congress to say yes to all of this, which is going to be tough in a time of the energy crisis. Can you really let go of a renewable resource? All parties have agreed upon that on the river. In the basin, you’ve got this new level of people that needs to be convinced.

Audience Question: Can you talk a little bit more about where your sympathies lay?

Kempas: I just really don’t like these black and white documentaries, these activist videos that tell you what to think. It was important to me that you get to know all these various parties that are involved and then make up your own mind. Obviously you can tell from the film which side my heart is on.

Audience Question: As a European, was it easier for you to make this film than if you were an American director?

Kempas: Yes…these guys, they’ve come all the way over from Germany, we should at least listen to them kind of thing…I think that was the same with the tribes and the corporation…It was this curiosity thing. They recognized that someone had come from that far to look into the story. Maybe that gives you a different level of respect of something. Maybe because I’m not a white U.S. filmmaker, I wasn’t so much perceived by the tribes as a white person as maybe others are. I can only guess at that. I don’t know.

Audience Question: How do you approach shooting scenes? Everything seems to be at the right place at the right time.

Kempas: I often was surprised myself that I happened to be in the right place at the right time. (I asked) FERC, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, about when exactly they were going to release a certain document and they would tell me. So I knew what day I had to be with certain people…When the decision by the judge came out…I phone Craig (Tucker, the environmentalist in the film)…and asked him before you call Wendy (George, wife of Merv George in the film)…can you wait until we’re there? I did these kind of little manipulations. He would have called her anyway, but I wanted to make sure we were in the room with the camera before the phone call would come.

Powers: When you started off, did you know you were getting into something that would be open-ended or did you have some kind of sense the story could be told quickly?

Kempas: I thought it was going to be told more quickly. I had no idea what I was getting myself into. I originally thought I’d do a half-hour reportage for German television. It just became bigger and bigger.

A Frenzy of Nonfiction Films at IFC Center

Q&A after screening of Barbara Kopple's My Generation at IFC Center.

This week I saw some really incredible nonfiction films at IFC Center. Monday night was a travelling festival of short documentary films called doxita, and last night was Barbara Kopple's 2000 feature documentary My Generation, about all of the Woodstock music festivals (1969, '94 & '99), which played as part of the Stranger Than Fiction series co-presented by the Woodstock Film Festival (taking place Oct. 1-5, 2008).

The six amazing little documentaries that made up doxita completely transfixed me into another world. All telling such simple, yet profound mostly personal stories from around the globe. The films included:

Vángelo Monzón (Argentina/Sweden, Andréas Lennartsson, 8 min.) - A visit with Vángelo Monzón who's been making bricks in Argentina since he was a boy.

Cross your Eyes, Keep them Wide (USA, Ben Wu, 23 min.) - An invitation into the San Francisco "Creativity Explored," a work space for artists with development disablilities

The Guarantee (USA, Jesse Epstein, 10 min.) - Through animated drawings, a man tells how he considered plastic surgery for his ballet career.

El Cerco (Spain, Ricardo Iscar/Nacho Martin, 16 min. ) - A breathtaking look at tuna fishing in the Mediterranean sea where the fight is a ritual of blood and death.

Martin Thomas (UK/Wales, Dylan Wyn Thomas, 31 min. ) - The sometimes painful yet ultimately joyous journey of one man's quest to stop his stammer.

Shit and Chicks (The Netherlands, Kees van der Geest, 10 min. ) - A portrait of a traditional method of feeding chickens in Ghana, done with gentle restraint.

To top that off, I really enjoyed watching the transition of music and generations from the late 1960s to the 1990s all in under two hours during the screening of Kopple's My Generation. Kopple was in attendance and did a Q&A along with the producer of all the Woodstocks, Michael Lang, who had asked her back in 1994 if she wanted to make a documentary about the 25th anniversary music festival. Kopple said that since the festival was being funded primarily by Polygram Records and the festival was going over budget, the film itself was nearly not made. Kopple said she wouldn't have that and somehow managed to work on it for the next five years up through next festival in 1999.

When asked if it was a problem getting the rights to the music for her film, Kopple said that Polygram already had the rights for the music in 1994. It was more difficult getting rights from Warner Bros. for the music from 1969. In 1999, she went individually to each band. For instance, she spent nearly six months leaving pleading messages with Fred Durst of Limp Bizkit. The experience to her was difficult, but well worth it.

Lang was asked what he thought while watching the film go from one era to the next and how he picked the bands to play each time around. He responded that when you look at such a long period of time, you see how you have changed. Things that felt the same from the first Woodstock through the last are the emotions. The different generations blended so easily together. In 1999, the kids who attended Woodstock felt lost. It was two years before 9/11 when the world would change again. The experiences from the first festival was similar to the later festivals in that the experience was re-created for a new generation. And as for the music, Lang picked the bands to perform in 1969 that he liked, while in '94 and '99, he picked the bands that both he and his kids liked.

Finally, Lang was asked what he felt about Woodstock '94 and '99 being sponsored by corporations. He said he would have preferred not to have corporate involvement, but there's a reality to making this happen. Had they not had those sponsors, tickets probably would have been as much as $300 a piece.

Stranger Than Fiction - "Join Us" - April 8, 2008

Stranger Than Fiction
Join Us
IFC Center – New York, NY
April 8, 2008

Tuesday night at IFC Center in New York, Ondi Timoner’s Join Us, a documentary that chronicles four families who undergo treatment at a cult recovery center in California after being controlled and abused by a pastor in a South Carolina church, played during Thom Powers’ popular nonfiction film series, Stranger Than Fiction.

David Nugent, Hamptons International Film Festival Director of Programming, stepped in for Powers, who was away, to host the program. Nugent began by introducing the film along with Timoner, saying that the film is timely due to the breaking news of the cult in Texas. Timoner said she began filming in 2005 at the only accredited live-in cult treatment facility in the world. She had been inspired to make this film in 2004 when Bush was re-elected, but that’s not what the film is about.

At the Q&A after the screening, Nugent asked where do we draw the line between organized religion and cults when it comes to living in a country that was founded on religious tolerance, to which Timoner responded that the whole idea of religious freedom has gone too far. Giving some religious organizations not-for-profit status is really highly abused thing in our country. The film raises awareness of this and every organization should be transparent and judged accordingly. A lot of cults have some of the smartest members of the population. The film is about our need to believe in and our feeling of belonging to something. She hopes that people of faith won’t be offended, but that they learn to balance faith when they’re ceding their lives to submit.

Nugent asked Timoner if there was anything in her religious background that prompted her to make this film. She replied that she has always been an individualist and was never in any clicks. Her dad is Jewish and her mom was Christian, but converted to Judaism, though they were never really religious.

One audience member asked Timoner what her process and personal involvement was to the characters. She said that these people’s faith had been violated, but when they showed up to the treatment facility, they were so open to being filmed. She showed respect and didn’t ever judge them.

Another audience member asked her how she got access to the Pastor and his wife, Raymond and Deborah. She said she wouldn’t have a film without Raymond. She learned of a book he wrote and contacted him to tell him she was making a film about religion, but didn’t mention that she was also including the ex-congregants.

When asked if any of the subjects have seen the film yet, Timoner said the ex-congregants who did see it, loved it and she thinks Raymond and Deborah have also seen it because someone ordered the DVD from the film’s website that was most likely them.

To purchase a DVD of Join Us, visit http://www.neoflix.com/store/Int03/.

"Manda Bala," "Billy the Kid," "Taxi to the Darkside" Among Winners of First Cinema Eye Honors

Tuesday night at New York’s IFC Center awards were handed out to the winners of the first ever Cinema Eye Honors for Nonfiction Filmmaking presented by Indiepix. In case you’re wondering, 'Cinema Eye' is named after the revolutionary group of young filmmakers led by pioneering documentarian Dziga Vertov. The Awards' blue-ribbon selection committee consisted of 12 programmers from North America's top film festivals, co-chaired by A.J. Schnack, Director of Kurt Cobain: About A Son, and Toronto Film Festival Documentary Programmer Thom Powers.

The Manda Bala crew pose for a picture before winning three awards including Outstanding Achievement in Nonfiction Filmmaking

Marshall Curry (STREETFIGHT) presented the award for Outstanding Achievement in a Debut Feature to…Billy The Kid - Jennifer Venditti

Alan Berliner (NOBODY’S BUSINESS, WIDE AWAKE) presented the award for Outstanding Achievement in Graphics and Animation to…Chicago 10 - Animation by Curious Pictures

Ross Kaufman (BORN INTO BROTHELS) presented the award for Outstanding Achievement in Cinematography to… Manda Bala - Heloísa Passos

Sam Pollard (JUNGLE FEVER, CLOCKERS, EYES ON THE PRIZE II) presented the award for Outstanding Achievement in Editing to Manda Bala – Doug Abel

Robert Drew (PRIMARY) presented the award for Outstanding Achievement in Producing to… Ghosts Of Cite Soleil - Seth Kanegis, Tomas Radoor & Mikael Rieks

Alex Gibney (TAXI TO THE DARKSIDE, ENRON: THE SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM) presented The Audience Choice Prize to…The King Of Kong: A Fistful Of Quarters - Director - Seth Gordon

Ricki Stern and Annie Sundberg (THE TRIALS OF DARRYL HUNT and THE DEVIL CAME ON HORSEBACK) presented the award for Outstanding Achievement in an International Feature to…The Monastery - Mr. Vig & the Nun, Director - Pernille Rose Grønkjær, Producer - Sigrid Dyekjær

Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky (BROTHER'S KEEPER, PARADISE LOST: THE CHILDHOOD MURDERS AT ROBIN HOOD HILLS, METALLICA: SOME KIND OF MONSTER) presented the award for Outstanding Achievement in Direction to…Taxi To The Dark Side - Alex Gibney

Barbara Kopple (HARLAN COUNTY USA, AMERICAN DREAM, SHUT UP AND SING) presented the award for Outstanding Achievement in Nonfiction Filmmaking to…
Manda Bala

Stay tuned to The Film Panel Notetaker for notes from the surprising director roundtable discussion that took place at the half-way point during the ceremony.

Cinema Eye Honors Presenters Announced

Indiepix announced today the lineup of presenters for the Cinema Eye Honors taking place Tuesday night at New York's IFC Center.

The full list of awards and presenters follows:

Outstanding Achievement in a Debut Feature – Marshall Curry (STREETFIGHT)

Outstanding Achievement in Graphics and Animation – Alan Berliner (NOBODY’S BUSINESS, WIDE AWAKE)

Outstanding Achievement in Cinematography – Ross Kaufman (BORN INTO BROTHELS)

Outstanding Achievement in Editing – Sam Pollard (JUNGLE FEVER, CLOCKERS, EYES ON THE PRIZE II)

Outstanding Achievement in Production – Robert Drew (PRIMARY)

Audience Choice Award – Alex Gibney (TAXI TO THE DARKSIDE, ENRON: THE SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM)

Outstanding Achievement in an International Feature – Ricki Stern and Annie Sundberg (THE TRIALS OF DARRYL HUNT and THE DEVIL CAME ON HORSEBACK)

Outstanding Achievement in Direction – Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofsky (BROTHER'S KEEPER, PARADISE LOST: THE CHILDHOOD MURDERS AT ROBIN HOOD HILLS, METALLICA: SOME KIND OF MONSTER)

Outstanding Achievement in Nonfiction Filmmaking – Barbara Kopple (HARLAN COUNTY USA, AMERICAN DREAM, SHUT UP AND SING)

The Film Panel Notetaker will be at the Cinema Eye Honors covering the night's events. Stay tuned!

Stranger Than Fiction - WHOLPHIN - February 12, 2008

Stranger Than Fiction
WHOLPHIN
IFC Center
February 12, 2008

Wholphin's Brent Hoff and Emily Doe at Minetta Tavern after Stranger Than Fiction

Two weeks ago, The Film Panel Notetaker shared notes from the Film as A Subversive Art Q&A at Thom Powers’ popular documentary series at New York’s IFC Center, *Stranger Than Fiction. Last night was week six of STF presenting Brent Hoff and Emily Doe of the DVD anthology Wholphin published by McSweeney’s. The event was sold out.

* Next week at Stranger Than Fiction is Best of Orphan Film Symposium presented by curator Dan Streible and special guests. Every other year, archivists from around the country gather to present unusual films of unknown origins dubbed "orphans." Founder Streible returns to STF with a rich sampling.

Thom opened the program by asking the audience if they had ever heard of Wholphin. A good chunk raised their hands. Thom said, “You’re virgins now, but you’re leaving here experienced.” Then he mentioned that that Issue 5: Winter Edition of Wholphin will be available soon. Thom then brought up Brent and Emily, who came in from San Francisco to brave the snowy weather in New York.

Last night’s line-up included a diverse array of non-fiction films from the outright hilarious to the very serious. And they were:

Heavy Metal Jr.
This was third viewing of this humorous short doc about a band of pre-teen Scottish heavy metal rockers. The first time I saw it was on the 4th edition Wholphin DVD. Then I saw it again on Sundance Channel recently. It was even better in a theater listening to other people’s reactions. Brent made a joke that there were no CDs of the music from the film to sell afterwards in the lobby, but it is available online.

Drunk Bees
This, and all of the following films, was my first viewing. The short doc examines the behavior of bees that are drawn to a special flower that produces fermented nectar, enabling them to be in an inebriated state. Other bees are also given alcohol in a research lab to examine their behavior. The doc, which was produced by Wholphin, features Brent in a bee suit.

Piece By Piece (Producer Jigar Mehta in attendance)
Much like the strange behavior of the drunken bees, Piece By Piece examines the addictive behavior of human beings who are drawn to making the Rubik’s Cube the soul essence of their being. Groups and individuals talk about their experiences of solving the colorful cubical puzzle in competitive matches. Brent said that all of the records since the film was made have been shattered. Jigar, who worked with Westside Filmworks on the film, said the idea for the documentary came from students at a summer workshop to film speed cubers. The directors of the film picked up cubing during the production and they all became quite good at it.

Next up was a series of one-minute films involving violence to balloons made by Wholphin contributor and artist William Lamson. Thom asked William why he chose balloons? William said they are really cheap material and all have a life span. Lamson is also known for his giant paper airplanes short film that has been playing as the trailer before the main program in Stranger Than Fiction for the past several weeks. Thom mentioned this short will also appear on Issue 5 of Wholphin.

American Outrage
A 30-minute excerpt of the feature documentary American Outrage was the final film screened. It is about two Shoshone Indian grandmothers in Nevada who struggle to keep their animals and livestock on native land that had been granted to their ancestors in a peace treaty many years ago. The U.S. government claims that these women and the Shoshone do not have rights to this land, and take evasive actions to round up their horses, killing and injuring most of them in the process for the sole purpose of clearing the land so they can dig for what is supposed to be one of the richest deposits of gold in the world. And if that wasn’t bad enough, the government soon decides that they’re going to make this land a test site for nuclear bombing, so the grannies and the people stand up and protest.

Stranger Than Fiction - "Film As a Subversive Art" - Jan. 29, 2008

Stranger Than Fiction
Film As a Subversive Art: Amos Vogel & Cinema 16
Q&A with Cinema 16 Veteran Jack Goelman
IFC Center
January 29, 2008

(Thom Powers and Jack Goelman)

Week four of Thom Powers’ (TP) popular documentary series at New York’s IFC Center, *Stranger Than Fiction, presented last night director Paul Cronin’s Film As a Subversive Art: Amos Vogel & Cinema 16. (FYI, Cronin is also the co-author of Herzog on Herzog.) The screening was followed by a Q&A with Cinema 16 veteran Jack Goelman (JG). Last night’s screening was co-presented by Rooftop Films. A bit of background on Vogel—he was the founder of the New York City avant-garde cinema club, Cinema 16 in the late 1940s. He later became the co-founder of the New York Film Festival in 1963. Film As a Subversive Art is also the title of Vogel’s 1974 book.

* Next Tuesday night, Stranger Than Fiction will present Sweet Dreams by Eric Latek.

(TP) What was your first interest in experimental cinema?

(JG) I started young. I was a film nut. I saw my fist documentary, The River by Pare Lorentz at the New York World’s Fair (1939/40). When I came out of the Army, I went to film school to become a film editor, but became distracted when I heard of Cinema 16. I attended a screening. It was very small. Experimental films fascinated me.

(TP) What’s different about cinema now than from back then?

(JG) The birth of Cinema 16 took place because the conditions were right at the time. There was no place to show short subject or off beat films. Amos came up with this idea.

(TP) Did you ever have differences of opinions with Amos?

(JG) Of course! And we talked a lot about them, but they had to fit into a concept of what we were planning, sometimes up to a year in advance. We kept track of them. We took notes. We had to like a film almost immediately. It was a question of blending programs and films together.

(TP) In the documentary, we see the 1,600-seat auditorium where Cinema 16 ran. Can you talk about that?

(JG) It was scary. I was there every minute taking notes. People would get up from their wooden seats and make noise. We would discuss the tempo of the show the next day. It was very much alive.

Audience Q&A

Q: How involved were filmmakers in the Cinema 16 screenings?

(JG) We tried not to involve them. Relationships with filmmakers were a different story. There was enough going on without that.

Q: What is Amos doing now?

(JG) We’ve all gotten older and slower. He’s not teaching anymore, but very much alert. His wife Marsha has been ill, and he’s watching over her.

Q: Why was it called Cinema 16?

(JG) Simply, Amos found out he could get a lot of film in 16mm. Screenings evolved where audiences grew larger and we needed more powerful 16mm projects. We wanted to show the films looking good. We also showed 35mm films such as John Cassavetes’ Shadows. We had a choice between 16mm or 35mm for that, but chose 35mm. We were criticized for it.

Q: The documentary mentions that Bosley Crowder, the film critic of The New York Times back then, didn’t support Cinema 16. Were there any other critics who did support it?

(JG) Yes. The Herald Tribune. Archer Winston loved Cinema 16. We did get a lot of members through The New York Times through advertising.

Q: What interests you in today’s cinema?

(JG) I read reviews. I have a sense of the directors. I don’t have a list of favorites with me, but I do go to the Walter Reade Theater, Cinema Village, etc.

Q: Do you think film programming now is diverse enough?

(JG) There’s a powerful situation now with television and DVD. It’s a different world. They’re useful, but competitive.