Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks™ Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 3 through August 30 in New York City and Los Angeles. We asked the filmmakers to share the stories behind their films—the inspirations, the challenges and obstacles, the goals and objectives, the reactions to their films so far.

So, to continue this series of conversations, here is Lindsay Ellis, director of The A-Word.

Synopsis: In the fall of 2009, Lindsay Ellis, a 25-year-old graduate student, made the decision to terminate her first and only pregnancy, finding the decision much more difficult than she anticipated. In this film, she attempts to humanize the experience by exploring both her own and others' by asking, is there even such a thing as the "right" choice?

IDA: This film is a very personal essay, and for a good reason: it serves the points you are trying to make about the conversation surrounding abortion. When you first started this project, did you know that the best introduction to this conversation would be through your voice and your story?

Lindsay Ellis At the beginning? I was on the fence. Since this was a project for my Masters program, I had a lot of voices pulling me in different directions. Ironically, one of my professors who eventually became one of my bigger supporters tried to talk me out of it, partially because it was too fresh (when I pitched it to the school it had only been a few months) and partially because she didn’t see how I could make it anything other than a series of talking heads describing an event that happened in the past. But I came to the conclusion fairly quickly that it needed to center around me, because many people told me that it would be pretty hypocritical for me to ask other women to be up front about their experiences if I wasn’t willing to do the same.

IDA: The inspiration for making the film seems pretty straightforward since you set out to describe your experience. But what made you turn to documentary instead of, say, writing a book?

LE I heard that argument as well; the very same professor suggested that perhaps I fictionalize it, perhaps in short form or prose form. I came to the conclusion very quickly that it absolutely had to be documentary, because I needed the format to convey that this wasn’t hypothetical or speculation on what someone might feel, but a document of what living, breathing people actually went through.

IDA: How did you meet the women you interview about their experiences?

LE: They came to me in many different avenues. A lot of them, especially for the pitch, were just women I knew personally. Some, like Aspen Baker, I found through Internet research. Others I found through referrals through pro-life groups. Some reached out to me through my blog and on Twitter. Oddly my "day job," such as it is, is as something of an Internet comedian, so it gave me a bit of reach in reaching out to people in both fundraising and trying to find subjects. So when I blogged or tweeted about the project, I had a few people reach out to me, one of whom (Melissa) ended up in the film.

IDA: How did your vision of the film change over the course of production? Did you have a short-form documentary in line the whole time?

LE: Because of the requirements of USC, it had to be short form, but given the opportunity to make it a feature I’m not sure I would take it. Twenty-six minutes drained the life out of me; I don’t know if I could handle longer, but if it were longer there was a lot of footage I loved that we shot but weren’t able to include, such as some academics who had done some studies on the subject and their findings, as well as how the experience effects men, as well. That was the hardest bit to cut, how the experience of abortion affected men (three of the five guys on my crew had gone through it as well), but with the restrictions we just didn’t have enough time given to explore their stories, besides Ritvik’s.

IDA: What were some of the challenges you encountered when making this film? What were some of the things you did to overcome those challenges?

LE: Many! I’d say the biggest was time, and scope. We benefited from more or less knowing what the structure, tone, and framing device would be from day one, such as the use of signs and the slightly irreverent tone; that was always in place, and that never changed. Believe it or not, having the "babydaddy" as both a subject and a part of the crew wasn’t as big a problem as one might imagine. We fought constantly, and that got to the other editor (who turned out to be crucial in finding the emotional weight of the film). But it was the kind of fighting that wasn’t personal; we’d fight over shot choices, editing, sound, music, because we cared about the final outcome so deeply. So there was a lot of friction on the crew, but I feel that was ultimately to the benefit of the piece. I find that’s often true of many art forms.

IDA: As you’ve screened The A-Word, how have audiences reacted to this film?

LE: The reaction’s been surprisingly positive, if we’re ignoring the gritty depths of the Internet. I’ve had people say they, being themselves pro-life, hadn’t wanted to watch it but were pleasantly surprised to find out our objective was to humanize and validate different viewpoints rather than proselytize some sort of political message.

IDA: So now that this film is done and you’ve entered it into DocuWeeks, have you had a chance to look beyond that at what’s next? Do you want to continue as a filmmaker?

LE: I’ve always told people that I don’t want to make films just for the sake of making films; I only want to direct (or produce or write or what-have you) if I’m the right fit for it, and if I have a story to tell. The reason I rushed this documentary out when I did, as quickly as I did, was that I knew I had a story to tell right then and there, and if I didn’t do it right then and there, it would never get told. I maintain that that’s still the case; there’s no way I would do it now, because I’ve moved on from that experience, and I don’t relate to it in the same way that I did when I made the film.

The A-Word will be screening August 17 through 23 at IFC Center in New York

Complete DocuWeeks™ 2012 program

Purchase tickets for The A-Word in New York

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks™ Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 3 through August 30 in New York City and Los Angeles. We asked the filmmakers to share the stories behind their films—the inspirations, the challenges and obstacles, the goals and objectives, the reactions to their films so far.

So, to continue this series of conversations, here is Brian McGinn, director of The Record Breaker.

Synopsis: Ashrita Furman holds the official record for the most Guinness World Records by one individual, including marks for "Largest Hula Hoop," "Most Apples Sliced in Mid-Air with a Samurai Sword", and "Longest Distance Bicycling Underwater." A health food store owner and devotee of meditation, Furman travels the world creating new categories for record achievement. We meet Furman, a singularly driven character, and his merry band of compatriots (including Champ the dog) as he's about to attempt to climb Machu Picchu on stilts.

IDA: How did you meet Ashrita Furman? What inspired you to tell his story?

Brian McGinn: I'd been searching for a great documentary subject for a while. A few of my favorite films are Amelie, Local Hero, Man on Wire, Wes Anderson's stuff and all the Errol Morris films (especially Fast, Cheap and Out of Control). The radio show This American Life is another huge influence, and I wanted to find a story that could be told with their mix of the intimate and universal. My roommate sent me to Ashrita’s website a few years ago. A couple weeks later, I read an article in The New York Times that had a photo of Ashrita slicing an apple with a samurai sword. He was working really hard, laser-focused on slicing the apple and I thought, "I should make a movie about that guy." It turned out Ashrita’s story wasn’t only about becoming a Guinness World Record breaker, but also about chasing happiness. From there, I got really lucky, found an amazing producer (the ridiculously awesome Mette Heide) and off we went!

IDA: You spent quite a bit of Ashrita’s training hours with him while making this film. Did you ever try to execute some of the feats he was attempting?

BM: I’ve attempted a number of the events for which Ashrita holds Guinness World Records, even practiced a few new records he’s made up for the book. I think a lot of people jump to conclusions when they hear about some of the sillier categories. They think that because he holds records for eating Jello blindfolded and snapping bananas in half, he isn’t a real athlete—that what he does is easy. I like to tell people about a record Ashrita holds for walking while carrying a brick in one hand. He carried that brick in his right hand — never putting it down — for a little over 85 miles. No one can ever believe that. Ashrita may not be Usain Bolt, but his concentration and fitness is impressive. I held a brick that same size in my hand and I wanted to put it down after 10 seconds!

To get in the spirit of what Ashrita does, I thought the crew should set world records while we shot. I spent a lot of time researching some of the "low entry point" records. In the end, none of us actually set anything. But for a while I practiced sorting M&Ms by color. I distinctly remember being disappointed after I learned that the mark for "Most Snails on Face" had increased dramatically since the publication of the previous year’s Guinness book. I thought I had a really good chance at that one.

IDA: How did your vision of the film change over the course of production? Did you have a short-form documentary in mind the whole time?

BM: Since I was both directing and editing, it was lucky that I worked with people that gave me great advice. Mette’s a genius at helping to pare down a story and Jean Tsien, a brilliant editor and generous spirit, helped immensely with things coming together. Over time, it became clear that 25 minutes was enough time to tell Ashrita’s story, give you a look at the unique life he lives, as well as introduce the audience to how those around him have been affected by Ashrita’s life choices—how his family has reacted and come to understand what he does, how his relationships have evolved over time—without wearing out our welcome. Hopefully audiences will think that we’ve succeeded in making a compelling and entertaining film that leaves you wanting more!

IDA: What were some of the challenges you encountered when making this film? What were some of the things you did to overcome those challenges?

IDA: Well, first off, Ashrita never slows down or stops, so working the way that I like to shoot documentary—with high-end (read: heavy) equipment and a distinct style—it was a challenge to keep up with him. Steve Milligan, my longtime collaborator and a very talented DP, is remarkably adept at taking a RED camera with a giant Angenieux zoom lens and operating it himself. We got good at moving VERY fast and covering scenes in a hurry—unlike more traditional, long-form documentary shooting, we couldn’t pick up inserts to work into the film during later shoots. It was either 'get it now or never.' That was probably the hardest part of production and the most gratifying—there’s no conventional wisdom for how to shoot a man slicing apples in mid-air with a samurai sword.

IDA: As you’ve screened The Record Breaker, how have audiences reacted to this film?

BM: We’ve been really lucky that audiences have responded to the film. One of the nice things about Ashrita’s story is that while it’s certainly odd, it’s also universal—we all choose how to live our lives and what path we’ll follow. How to be happy is a one of the big questions we all want to answer. Of course, not everyone’s path to happiness involves setting over 400 Guinness World Records. That’s not for everyone.

IDA: So now that this film is done and you’ve entered it into DocuWeeks, have you had achance to look beyond that at what’s next? Do you want to continue making films?

BM: I’m working on a new documentary right now about smooth jazz legend Kenny G. I like to call it the Kenny G documentary you wouldn’t expect. I can’t wait for people to see it. And then I’m reading a bunch of fiction scripts, as well as making my way through a substantial backlog of magazine and newspaper articles in search of another film!

The Record Breaker will be screening August 17 through 23 at IFC Center in New York

Complete DocuWeeks™ 2012 program

Purchase tickets for The Record Breaker in New York

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks™ Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 3 through August 30 in New York City and Los Angeles. We asked the filmmakers to share the stories behind their films—the inspirations, the challenges and obstacles, the goals and objectives, the reactions to their films so far.

So, to continue this series of conversations, here is Everardo González, director of Drought/Cuates de Australia.

Synopsis: Residents from the ejido (communal land) Los Cuates de Australia in Northeast Mexico perform every year a massive exodus to look for water during drought. In this exile, men, women, elders, and children wait for the first drops of water to return to their lands, metaphor of a small town that hides from death.

IDA: You’ve been working in film for a number of years now. What got you started in the documentary world?

Everardo González I arrived to the world of documentaries by accident; it wasn’t really in my plans. I was training as a photographer and I came across an exercise in film school that became my first film (La canción del pulque / The Song of Pulque, 2003). I found through documentary possibility of narrating cinematographic chronicles and I loved it.

IDA: I watched you speak on the Cafe Latino panel during the Los Angeles Film Festival about Drought and what it’s like to be a part of the Latino filmmaking community. While there, you said you made this film partially because you wanted to get away from your everyday life in Mexico City. How did you get in touch with the migrant farming community in Cuates de Australia?

EG: Filming Drought became a kind of retirement. I was simultaneously filming another documentary (El cielo abierto / The Open Sky, 2011) that traced the beginning of the civil war in El Salvador and the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero.

The filming of this movie was quite painful, the war stories were heartbreaking. When I finished filming for a bit in Central America, I traveled to Cuates de Australia to continue the project and the time of isolation and distance from such war stories made the filming of Drought a moment of peace.

I arrived to Cuates de Australia from 2004 and I kept the story until 2007, which was the year I began filming. From that moment, my relationship with the cowboys of Coahuila began to break distance.

IDA: While on the panel, you also mentioned that the community was never totally united in their enthusiasm for having you there. What were some tense moments that you can remember while shooting?

EG: There were always mixed opinions about my presence at the ranch, those who did not want me there and who opened the doors of their homes. Working for four years made those who were against it, little by little, accept me. I ended up being accepted by the community.

A tense moment was during the horse races that were organized to celebrate the baptism of children. Some had drunk beer and were more aggressive, a fight broke out and some of the hits were against me and my crew. That sequence was included in the final cut.

IDA: A scene that really stood out for me was the one in which a boy drinks so much water that it makes him literally sick. We see him run outside of the house to vomit. This community has a relationship with water that is so different from anything most of us have ever experienced. Can you expand on that?

EG: "Entripar" is a card game played in the Northeast area of Mexico, whoever loses must drink two glasses of water until they get sick. It is not exclusive to this ranch, it’s played throughout this region. I think that the relationship with water is the same as everyone; the only difference is that their water supply ends, and they somehow experience the scarcity first hand, not as a potential threat but rather as a close reality.

IDA: Did your vision of the project change over the course of production?

EG: The project was taking shape over the months of filming, the story of the exodus and drought remained but more concepts were added such as the cycle of life and the confrontation between man and his environment.

IDA: As you’ve screened Drought, how have audiences reacted?

EG: The audiences have been surprised by the amount of happiness these cowboys are capable of even while facing adversity; this is the most hopeful aspect of the story.

IDA: After the film’s win at the Los Angeles Film Festival and now its inclusion at DocuWeeks, this film is having quite a year! So what’s next for you?

EG: I am currently working on finding distribution of the film in the U.S., and I hope that my participation in DocuWeeks helps me achieve that.

Drought will be screening August 10 through 16 at IFC Center in New York, and August 17 through 23 at Laemmle NoHo 7 in Los Angeles.

Complete DocuWeeks™ 2012 program

Purchase tickets for Drought in New York

Purchase tickets for Drought in Los Angeles

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks™ Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 3 through August 30 in New York City and Los Angeles. We asked the filmmakers to share the stories behind their films—the inspirations, the challenges and obstacles, the goals and objectives, the reactions to their films so far.

So, to continue this series of conversations, here is Lauren Greenfield, director of Beauty CULTure.

Synopsis: Beauty CULTure explores how feminine beauty is defined and revered, and the consequences for female body image. Through an examination of the photography industry and iconic fashion images, the film investigates our age-old obsession with beauty, its biological origins, and the role of the media and technology in narrowing its definition with ubiquitous imagery. Fashion photographers, avant-garde artists, celebrated models, child pageant stars, body builders, teenagers, and intellectuals engage in a provocative dialogue about the "beauty contest" of modern life.

IDA: A lot of your work deals with the very real impact of the same issues you bring up in this film—our overexposure, as a society, to images of unattainable beauty. Your film Thin in particular comes to mind. So what inspired you to take it a step back and look at the causes, instead of just the effect?

Lauren Greenfield: Before this in my work, I had worked at the beauty industry and the pressure on female bodies, and how the body had become the primary expression of identity for girls and women. I had done it mostly from the point of view of first-person research in the field, my own reportage shooting of girls and how they are affected in contemporary culture. So the film Beauty CULTure gave me an opportunity to step back and look at how beauty has been an obsession in our culture historically—instead of just looking from the cultural context, looking at from an evolutionary point of view. [This] was a perspective that Nancy Etcoff gave me in the film and in her work.

Beauty CULTure was a commission from the Annenberg Space for Photography to go with the exhibition "Beauty Culture." I didn’t originate Beauty CULTure. I was one of the artists in the show, and when I was meeting with the curator Kohle Yohannan, there was [so much] overlap between the themes that I’d explored in my photography in the last 20 years. It was an opportunity that I couldn’t pass up, even though it was in the middle of The Queen of Versailles.

This was also an opportunity for me to [...] look at the role of photography and specifically beauty and fashion photography in shaping these images. In the film, I got to deconstruct that even further and look at the image makers: the make-up artists, the clothes, the models, the model agents. In the process of making the film, I also wanted to kind of break down the fourth wall and deconstruct those boundaries, so we also filmed the behind-the-scenes on our own set. As our people were getting ready for their interviews, we did verite footage of them and then also built two-way mirrors in the studios in LA and New York where we could film the subjects getting ready for their moment of their interview through the make-up mirror.

IDA: What was the process you went through to gather so many well-known figures from the beauty and entertainment industries? Did those contacts come through the exhibit at Annenberg?

LG: It was totally crazy because I think I got the commission in February, we had about two or three weeks to prepare and find all the people, and then we had to fit them into these crazy slots. We basically had two days in Paris, four days in New York, and three days in LA. And these are important people who have to fit into our schedule!

In terms of getting to the different people, it was a variety of ways. Some of the people were familiar with my work and responded [very] positively. Jamie Lee Curtis both knew my work and also was a supporter of the Annenberg Space. Some were my own photographic subjects. One of the things I wanted to do in the project was also see what it was like to be in front of the camera both as a model but also as a real person. So Ms. Senior California was somebody I’d photographed before, as was Cathy Grant, the woman who got plastic surgery in Brazil. Some of them were subjects of other photographers in the show—the bodybuilder was a subject of the photographer Martin Schoeller, so he introduced me [to her]. The photographers were also photographers in the show—Albert Watson, Melvin Sokolsky, Tyen and Orlan also were represented in the museum show. We did it all in studio so that we could see so many people in this short space of time.

We just kind of worked the phones madly. Through the Annenberg, through the curator, through my own relationships, we put together a really great research team. We had to move so quickly, so we researched different people who would make sense for this. It was a much more diverse group than I usually interview and also so many at once, so for me it was like being in college again. I basically went into a room for like three weeks and just read, and just tried to kind of educate myself. Even though I had been steeped in a lot of the issues of the film for a long time, there really were a lot new perspectives that I was coming to brand new. Something that I was really excited to look into was the part about the color of beauty that Beth Ann Hardison speaks to and that the teenagers speak to. In a way, that was something that I had missed out on in the process of making Girl Culture. The book touches on it, but I felt like the book didn’t go deep enough. This was a chance to look into that.

IDA: One of the things I found fascinating was your choice to comment on the culture of beauty while also showing that your interview subjects went through a regimented process of getting their makeup and hair done before sitting down in your interview chair. Can you explain why you chose to show those "behind the scenes" moments?

LG: I wanted to break down the fourth wall and deconstruct what goes into a film shoot. And so since the whole "beauty culture" was kind of about the artifice of what do we do to present and have a public face. Particularly for models—for all the people in a different way, whether it’s the teenager or the model, or the challenges of getting older. It just seemed like we had to expose our own process. And for me that’s, as image makers, looking at our own complicity in the process, too. Almost all of us in the film—and I include myself as a director—are part of making these images that then have this kind of effect in the world. So whether it was Albert Watson talking about how he thinks about women when he’s photographing them, or Tyen showing us the process of how he makes somebody up, and then I put myself on camera for the first time too.

IDA: I was going to ask about that. Why did you choose to include that "interview" of yourself in the film?

LG: I shot it not knowing whether I would use it or not, but thinking I had to at least shoot the interview of myself mostly because of the issues that I wanted to bring up. I actually told my editor "Let’s not use the part about me unless we absolutely have to." And then it turned out that we did have to. There are a couple of places where I come in. Once was to talk about the precocious sexuality of girls, and how a girl learns at an early age that her value or her currency comes from her body. That was just a really important concept for me in my own work, and nobody else had said it. If somebody else had said it, I probably would have used it!

As a director, there’s certain things you have to get across, and a lot of times it can emerge from the material. But it didn’t. In the end, it did make sense for me to be on there, because why should I be hiding behind the camera, too? So we also included my photographing in the project, too, and then you also see Tyen photographing and Albert Watson photographing. And then I also got to talk about my experience photographing Cathy. It just seemed to close the loop and close the circle and offer a kind of transparency about the process that was the subject of the piece.

IDA: This film had to be pretty structured—it’s sort of a departure from what you did with Thin, which was sort of following these girls around, watching their lives unfold and not knowing exactly what you were going to use in the film. I’m sure that there was a little bit of that uncertainty in this project too, but it’s shot almost entirely in one studio room, or at least it appears that way.

LG: It’s shot in three locations, in New York, in LA and in Paris. In New York and LA we were in a studio. This was a really compressed production schedule. It was nothing like Thin. With Thin, we spent two years developing the idea and then were shooting for ten weeks over a six month period and then editing for six months. This was about 10 days of shooting. It was very structured.

From the beginning, we knew it was really going to be an interview-based piece. We had the photographs, we had the interviews, the b-roll of the part in the studio, and then we used some archival footage, too. That evolved in the edit room—we didn’t really know how we would use that when we were thinking about it. It’s a really different kind of piece. I guess the main thing was, it’s really a conversation about beauty from a lot of different points of view, from a lot of different kind of data points. It’s really about these people and how they fit together, and how they’re all part of this industry. Also, social commentators like Alex Kozinski and Nancy Etcoff can give us another way to consider our contemporary notions of beauty.

Stylistically, part of the film is you’re kind of getting bombarded with imagery by using all the photographs. In a way, that’s also what the film is about: the ubiquitous imagery of beauty images in our lives and how that affects us, too.

IDA: Did your vision of the outcome of the piece, your vision of what the film would eventually be change at all, or do you feel like it evolved?

LG: I’m not somebody who writes out how things go. I’m not a writer. I don’t really do documentaries that way. My new film Queen of Versailles is a lot more like Thin in the sense of going out there and just getting stuff in the field, then putting it together. I don’t write a script or anything. This film really came together in the edit room. I worked really closely with Catherine Bull, who is a commercial editor. I think it was only a commercial editor who could have made something of the material in this time frame. I mean, we worked so fast. She really helped me weave it together. We really did a paper edit in the edit room and wove the story together first. And then we had these boards full of all the photographs. I was working on sequencing those, and kind of putting them together with the words. It was like a jigsaw puzzle.

IDA: So I think you kind of explained what some of the challenges were—time constraints and that sort of thing. But what were some other things that you didn’t necessarily anticipate and how did you get through those things when they were happening?

LG: One thing that was fun about doing this in a studio and having all these people come there was seeing some of the matchups and meetings that were not planned at all. Like Eden Wood from Toddlers and Tiaras just started talking with the bodybuilder. And between the outfits and the crazy gender-bender stuff, it was just really fun to see that and to get to document a little bit of it. I mean, that’s the kind of thing where if we had had more time, I probably would have gone much more into. Even though it was so structured, in terms of the interviews and how much time we had with everybody, we still had a verite crew going so that we were able to catch unexpected moments. For me, in the way that I work, those are always the most exciting moments.

It was great to get to meet some of my idols. Gilles Bensimon was the art director at Elle [and] he was the person who gave me my first fashion assignment. I’m not a fashion photographer but he saw my documentary work and my style, and said to try that but in fashion. And so it was really fun to get to kind of turn the tables and interview him, having remembered the time I was invited into his office as this kind of pivotal moment in my career. When we filmed Albert Watson, half of my camera crew had been through his studio in some way, assisting or working on camera. It was really fun to get to talk to all of these people who were, many of them, icons on this business. Nancy Etcoff’s book Survival of the Prettiest just turned me on my head in terms of thinking about these issues of beauty and why so many of the clothes, so much of the surgery is about expressing these symbols of fertility. I’d never really thought about that—the big lips and the big breasts and the small waists. It was just really exciting to get new perspectives on old themes.

IDA: With this film playing at DocuWeeks and then Best Director Award that you just won at Sundance for The Queen of Versailles, you’ve had a really big year. So what’s next for you?

LG: I have to say my head is spinning right now! It has been crazy. It was a great opportunity to get to make Beauty CULTure and also crazy making it in the middle of what was The Queen of Versailles. It was a great year but also a totally crazy one. What I’m working on now is a book about wealth, which was actually kind of where The Queen of Versailles came from—this photographic project I’ve been working on for years about wealth. I’m hoping to finish the book and the museum show for late 2013.

Beauty CULTure will be screening August 10 - August 16 at Laemmle NoHo 7 in Los Angeles.

Complete DocuWeeks™ 2012 program

Purchase tickets for The Anderson Monarchs in Los Angeles

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks™ Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 3 through August 30 in New York City and Los Angeles. We asked the filmmakers to share the stories behind their films—the inspirations, the challenges and obstacles, the goals and objectives, the reactions to their films so far.

So, to continue this series of conversations, here is Patrick Shen, director of La Source.

Synopsis: Narrated by Oscar-nominated actor Don Cheadle (Hotel Rwanda, Crash), in what The Washington Post calls an "artfully shot documentary," La Source tells the uplifting story of Josue Lajuenesse, a Haitian Princeton janitor who returns to his country after the devastating 2010 earthquake to revive his lifelong dream to bring what is most fundamental to his village's survival: clean water.

IDA: How did you get started in documentary filmmaking?

Patrick Shen: I took video production class when I was still in high school. The plan was simply to make a music video for my band at the time not begin a lifelong obsession with filmmaking, but that’s what I got. I got my start in documentaries when I was hired to shoot some re-enactments for the Emmy-nominated We Served with Pride over a decade ago.

IDA: When and how did you meet Josue and learn his story? What was it about his particular story that made you think there was a film to be made from his story?

PS: Josue was one of 8 subjects I featured in my last film The Philosopher Kings. We had stumbled upon a much larger story about a man who was on the brink of fulfilling a lifelong dream to bring water to his village in Haiti and we just kept the cameras rolling.

IDA: What kind of a crew did you have with you both in Princeton and in La Source? Was it difficult to travel with your crew and equipment?

PS: Depending on the shoot, we had anywhere between 1 and 5 of us. Most of the time there were two of us shooting and we did our own sound. On occasion we had a production assistant and Jess Koehler, our brilliant photographer, accompanied us on every trip to Haiti. Traveling around in Haiti with all our gear and crew was definitely tricky. Road and traffic conditions in Haiti make it especially difficult to get around especially in a large group with luggage and gear in tow. A distance that would normally take 5 minutes to travel often took 10 times longer.

IDA: What were some of the challenges that you faced while you were making this film? How did you overcome those obstacles?

PS: Money is always the biggest challenge but that's hardly a surprise anymore. With such a strong NGO presence in the film, editing La Source in such a way that it didn't feel like a promo video but also honored their involvement in the whole process was very tricky. This was Josue's dream and he needed to be the driving force in the film. It took us many passes on the edit before it started to feel right.

IDA: Did you ever feel an obligation to step in and help the people in the village with their water supply? Or perhaps help Josue by giving him a little extra money? How did you navigate those feelings?

PS: Yes. Josue and the people of La Source are like an extension of my own family. It was the obligation that I felt towards the village and Josue that compelled me to make the film and give so many years of my life to telling their story. With this film we’re planning to launch a campaign to raise enough funds to build a proper school for the children in La Source...so our involvement isn’t over.

IDA: As you’ve screened La Source, how have audiences reacted to the film?

PS: We’re currently trying to find sponsors to cover costs for us to screen the film there.

IDA: So now that this film is done and you’ve entered it into DocuWeeks, have you had a chance to look beyond that at what’s coming next?

PS: We’re in talks with distributors to release the film more widely. We’ll also be continuing our festival run through the rest of this year and maybe into 2013. Beyond that, we’re launching a nationwide campaign in partnership with Generosity Water to raise funds for a school in La Source as well as more water projects throughout Haiti.

La Source will be screening August 3 through 9 at IFC Center in New York, and August 10 through 16 at Laemmle NoHo 7 in Los Angeles.

Complete DocuWeeks™ 2012 program

Purchase tickets for La Source in New York

Purchase tickets for La Source in Los Angeles

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks™ Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 3 through August 30 in New York City and Los Angeles. We asked the filmmakers to share the stories behind their films—the inspirations, the challenges and obstacles, the goals and objectives, the reactions to their films so far.

So, to continue this series of conversations, here is Eugene Martin, director of The Anderson Monarchs.

Synopsis: The Anderson Monarchs is about a nationally competitive African-American girls soccer club competing, living, and thriving in an at-risk urban neighborhood in Philadelphia. Nominated in 2008 by Sports Illustrated as "Sports Team" of the year, they were also hailed as "the future of American Soccer" in the London newspaper, The Guardian. The Anderson Monarchs, like their namesake Marian Anderson, are making history. Their remarkable story brings them to a place they only ever imagined in their dreams.

IDA: How did you get started as a documentary filmmaker?

Eugene Martin: I got an MFA from Temple University in filmmaking in 1990. The emphasis at that time was on documentary filmmaking. I made three documentaries on 16mm film while I was in grad school. I also worked a lot as a DP on fiction films. I then wrote and directed a series of films based on true stories, notably Diary of a City Priest starring David Morse. After that, I went back to documentary full time about 8 years ago. I also teach filmmaking at the Univ of North Texas, and we have an MFA degree program in Documentary Film, so I am very at home with my working situation both personally and professionally.

IDA: When and how did you meet this soccer team and learn their story?

EM:I met the Anderson Monarchs when I was coaching soccer for my daughters teams. We used to play them in the winter indoor leagues and they were always so good! I got to know the coach, Walter Stewart, and from there, starting in 2007 and 2008, I started to think about doing a film about them. It grew very naturally out of my desire to help girls have a strong self-image and learn to be confident about themselves. I could see that Coach Walt was doing the same thing with his teams, but for them, I realized they were the only all girls African-American soccer team in the US, and realized for sure that they were making history. I felt compelled and driven to capture their story.

IDA: What kind of crew did you have with you when you were shooting?

EM: I worked for most of the film with just one other person, the cinematographer Jen Schneider, and I did sound. For the soccer games I used a few more people to cover the action on the field. It was for the most part a very small crew.

IDA: What were some of the challenges you faced while you were making this film? How did you deal with the limitations that this production presented you?

EM: The biggest thing I learned on this film was that it just needed time. The characters we follow aged from 11 to 13, and I needed to spend 3 years with them to fully capture their story. I also am very sensitive to the fact that urban girls are often portrayed in a negative light, and I was determined to not take that road. I also did not want to make a typical sports film about the underdog overcoming all the odds, etc.

IDA: Have the girls and families of the soccer players seen the film?

EM: Yes, and they are very happy with how they are portrayed in the film. I really wanted to make sure we never stereotype the girls or their situations, and I think I have succeeded in this goal.

IDA: As you’ve screened The Anderson Monarchs, how have audiences reacted to the film?

EM: We are just starting to screen the film, so I'll let you know in a few weeks!

IDA: So now that this film has made it into DocuWeeks, have you had a chance to look beyond that at what’s coming next?

EM: Yes, I am working on another long term documentary about young men in the inner city. I just finished year 5 of it, and am releasing a one hour version of that in 2013. Altogether it will be a 10 year project. Guess I like to let things take awhile to develop!

The Anderson Monarchs will be screening August 17 through 23 at IFC Center in New York, and August 24 through 30 at Laemmle NoHo 7 in Los Angeles.

Complete DocuWeeks™ 2012 program

Purchase tickets for The Anderson Monarchs in New York

Purchase tickets for The Anderson Monarchs in Los Angeles

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks™ Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 3 through August 30 in New York City and Los Angeles. We asked the filmmakers to share the stories behind their films—the inspirations, the challenges and obstacles, the goals and objectives, the reactions to their films so far.

So, to continue this series of conversations, here is Kelly Richardson, director of Without A Net.

Synopsis: Djeferson, Bárbara, Rayana, and Platini live in a drug controlled slum of Rio de Janeiro. Their families are struggling, their homes are physically unstable, and everyone they know has dropped out of school. When a big-top circus tent suddenly appears in a nearby parking lot, they decide to take a chance. They learn trapeze, acrobatics, juggling, and contortion, and then audition for the end-of-year show, rehearse, and prepare for the curtains to part on opening night. Along the way, Without A Net explores the connections between risk, desire, poverty, and circus and celebrates the perseverance and resilience of youth in the face of tremendous odds.

IDA: Last week Without A Net was at DocuWeeks in Los Angeles. How was that?

Kelly J Richardson: It was wonderful! We had an especially strong turnout from the LA acrobatic and circus community. On opening night, a couple dozen local acrobats did an acro flash mob outside of the theater, and then a professional trio did a pre-film contortion and acrobatics performance inside the theater. It was a great way to kick off the premiere week! Then we had good screenings, good audiences and good Q&A's all week. Also, Without A Net received some very good reviews—it was recommended by the LA Weekly and the Village Voice, and written up by the Los Angeles Times and LA Latino Weekly and several others. So all in all, LA DocuWeeks was great!

IDA: I understand that you studied dance and are trained in acrobatics. So how does a circus performer get started in documentary filmmaking?

KR: My performance art and my journey as a filmmaker are somewhat interwoven. As a kid I was a gymnast, and I've been an athlete of various sports all my life. I'm also interested in new experiences and in the middle of college I studied abroad in Madrid, and while there [...] I enrolled in trapeze and acrobatics classes at a local circus. It was fun to be with a foreign circus and it was great to learn about the culture through that window.

Two years later, I was traveling a little bit after college and I was kind of on the lookout for a circus to join. I found one in Bahia in the Northeast of Brazil. In that circus [...] there was also a social project which was funded by various organizations inside and outside of Brazil. The goal was to [bring] children and youth living in poverty in the area to train for free at the circus. Through doing so, [the participants could] learn skills that they could transfer to other parts of their lives—things like cooperation, team building, how to set goals and achieve them, how to face their fears, those kinds of things which are really valuable and essential to getting along in society.

I was interested in that general concept of using circus as a tool for social change. More importantly though, I got to know the performers in that social project. There's such a strong component of risk and excitement in the circus. It's an art where people show off how risky it is and how brave they are—so the riggers are always lifting the aerial apparatuses higher so the audience can feel more nervous and impressed by the potential danger. Another classic circus act is the tightrope walker pretending to almost fall and recovering. As I heard the stories and watched the acts, I was noticing various strong parallels between the way the performers told about the risks of their day-to-day lives and the way they exhibited the risk and excitement of the art that they practiced in the circus and that to me was the initial seed that later grew into the documentary.

IDA: But how did you pick up that camera for the first time? How did you understand how to edit and put a story together visually—a lot of those various skills that people go to school for. How did you get started with that?

KR: I found out that "social circus" (that's the term for all projects that teach circus skills to at-risk youth) exists in many parts of the world, and Brazil is really a leader in this movement. So I applied for a Fulbright grant to go back and be involved in the movement again since I had this particular insider's perspective on it. I had about a year from the time I applied until the time I returned to Brazil with the grant to take lots of classes, and be involved in other people's productions and do my own short films. So I had about a year of really good filmmaking education all over the Bay Area at Film Arts Foundation (before it merged with the San Francisco Film Society), BAVC, UC Berkeley, City College—a bunch of places. I also worked on a lot of sets and just got as much experience as I could in that time I had before returning to Brazil to make the film.

IDA: The inspiration for making the film seems pretty straightforward since the subject is something in which you are so deeply entrenched. What was it about this particular circus in Rio that made you want to tell their story?

KR: Once I was awarded the Fulbright, I had some time to define my project—how exactly I wanted it to be. So knowing that there were a bunch of social circus project in Brazil, I went to visit a few others besides the one that I had gotten to know in Bahia. I found the performers in Rio fascinating. There's a lot going on in Rio. It's this impressive mix of rich and poor, beach and mountains, and lots and lots of energy. Then in the circus, the people that I met had great stories. Djeferson was one of the first people I met. He's very gregarious and fun to be around--a big personality along with his big physical size. He introduced me to some of the members of his family, and he was laughing a lot and excited about the idea of me being there. I got to know him a little bit at that time and I thought, "Oh, this guy would be great as a character, and other people should hear these stories." Usually, his stories and stories from that area don't travel very much.

IDA: Outside of Djeferson, did you always know that you wanted your story to focus on those other three individuals also, or did you follow a lot of them and then just edit it down so that we only heard these four stories?

KR: I wanted the film to be intimate and somewhat collaborative. I didn't want it to feel like I came in and filmed them and then left and that was that. I wanted them to have time to get to know me a little bit and see if this was something that they wanted to do. Djeferson was extremely enthusiastic from the beginning. Some of the others got into it as they got to know me. Bárbara the acrobat and her friend Rayana, they were a little stand-offish at the beginning. But once we got to know me better and we started sharing jokes, they decided they were interested in participating in it. We had some more footage of some other characters that we ended up cutting down, like Coach Allan. We felt like these four main characters had the strongest stories and that they serve as good examples for a larger picture we were trying to create. I think that they really wanted to do it, and so they were open to and available for interviews and allowed me to come to their homes and welcomed that.

IDA: I know that resources were probably pretty limited while you were over there. A lot of those kids have to deal with family issues and with just getting food. On top of those things, what were some of the challenges you encountered when making this film? What were some of the things you did to overcome those challenges?

KR: I encountered a lot of challenges making this film. In addition to the technical things—as I mentioned, I was pretty new at using the camera and recording audio and everything else, but luckily I had no major technical disasters—there were a lot of things that were challenging to me. Working on a film where people are telling their very personal stories—and you, as a filmmaker, are taking those stories away to an audience that they don't know, well, gives you a lot of things to think about, especially when there's a huge difference in social class, economic reality, privilege and education—these people are all very smart but they've all dropped out of school or haven't been to school at all. Djeferson has never really been to school. He's illiterate.

IDA:You were in the unique position of not only knowing a lot about circus but having been there yourself. So did you decide to step in and help her a little bit? How did you navigate that?

KR: It was really hard to navigate. There were situations where the performers were doing their acts without proper security. As circus performers, we always want to have security in case there's a mistake. Of course, I come from the US where we have a much more litigious society, so at the gyms where I trained, things like that would never fly. It would never be allowed. I definitely tried to separate myself and think, "This is a different place. This is not my place. I'm here to film this interesting thing that's happening in the world and our realities are very different." Sometimes that was hard.

I was always reminding myself there are a lot of differences between my own experience and their experience. I found myself not saying things that I might have said if I hadn't been with the camera. If I hadn't been there as a filmmaker I might have had suggestions for how the circus should run their program, and how they should have better equipment. But that really wasn't my place, but sometimes it was hard to stand back and not say anything. As far as Rayana, there was one point where I said to her that I was concerned about the way that she was training. I felt compassion for all these people. That was one of the big challenges I faced, because there were a lot of times that I felt I couldn't say what I would have liked to say if I hadn't been there with a film. Contortion is fine for the body, and I am a contortionist as well. I'm not saying that contortion is not good for the body, but training in the wrong way can be dangerous. At one point I said something like that.

But that's another thing. Most of them are teenagers. So they all know everything more than anybody else does. And furthermore, I'm a foreigner. There was a lot of that kind of interplay also. And plus, [Rayana]'s extremely talented, and she's a much better contortionist than I am. So who am I to say that might not be good for her? Also, there were some coaches who had suggestions for them, and because they were teenagers they were the way that teenagers are. There's something really delightful about that. They're sure of themselves. They're so courageous, and they're so determined and so committed. They are lovely people.

IDA: You mentioned earlier that it was sort of hard sometimes to listen to these stories especially with these subjects knowing that they are going to be told to audiences who they might not ever get to interact with. As you've screened Without A Net in different screenings and countries and especially last week in Los Angeles, how have audiences reacted to the film?

KR: We've had really good responses from audience and critics. Audiences have said it feels like it's an honest film, and intimate, which was one of our big goals, and that the characters share a lot about themselves and about their lives. Also that it's nuanced with multiple layers. We explore the theme of the duality of risks in their day-to-day lives and risks and excitement in the circus. I think in that context, the characters develop a kind of personality where they embrace risk, in fact, thrive in it. An example of that is the scene where the two guys climb the rock and decide to jump off, into the water.

IDA: Oh yeah, that made me really anxious. I was thinking, "They don't know what's under the water!"

KR: (laughs) They embrace that rush of adrenaline that comes with putting their lives on the line because they do it all the time just to survive. So that was one of the themes we liked developing and the audience comments on that sometimes. A lot of people ask about Platini, the littlest boy. He's the one who lost the older brother because of his involvement with the drug trade. A lot of people want to know where are these characters now and what are they up to. I [keep in touch] pretty regularly with almost all of them and know what they are up to. They have lots of difficult things going on in their lives, and many of those things are touched upon in the film. Life is never calm for them. But all things considered, I'd say they're doing very well.

IDA: Have the four main characters or anyone else involved with the circus seen the film?

KR: They've seen it at lots of different stages. Mostly [the subject's] realities are in that area and their stories don't get out of that area. They can see what's happening in other parts of the world from watching TV, and they're very connected in that way, and they're online, so they can see what's happening in the rest of the world. But it's a limited view through that lens. So I thought a lot about what it would feel like to know that I, a foreigner and older than them, was leaving with footage of them telling me intimate stories. Like Platini, the little boy talking about losing his brother—that's a very personal story. I really tried to put myself in their shoes and thought a lot about what it would feel like if I were them. Though we got to know each other, still, I'm a foreigner and when production was over, I was leaving. It was very important to me to be very transparent.

When I filmed them in their homes, I gave them all the footage that I filmed. I made a DVD right away after I went to their homes and I gave it to them the next day with the whole footage so there wouldn't be any surprises down the line. They have also seen the film edited together at various stages because I went back to do the one-year later footage, and I showed them a rough cut at that point. Then I did another trip for some pick up shots, and I showed them another rough cut. So they are familiar with what the film is about. They haven't seen it in its final version but at least the main characters [...] have seen most of the film.

IDA: So now that this film is done and you've entered it into DocuWeeks, have you had a chance to look beyond that at what's coming next? Do you want to make another film? Are you thinking about going back into doing circus?

KR: I continue to practice circus because I love it. But I don't perform any more... at least I have no plans to right now. As far as Without A Net, we have some more festivals coming up, and we're talking to distributors. As far as my career as a filmmaker, I plan to keep working in film. I got the bug! I enjoy being able to construct stories and convey my ideas through the medium of film. I think it's a way of encapsulating an idea and reaching across the divide to affect another person. The whole experience of making Without A Net was very rich and full for me. I learned so much about myself in the process and I'm so glad that I had the opportunity to have the people in Without A Net in my life.

Without A Net will be screening August 10 through 16 at Laemmle NoHo 7 in Los Angeles, and August 17 through the 23 at IFC Center in New York.

Complete DocuWeeks™ 2012 program

Purchase tickets for Without A Net in New York

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks™ Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 3 through August 30 in New York City and Los Angeles. We asked the filmmakers to share the stories behind their films—the inspirations, the challenges and obstacles, the goals and objectives, the reactions to their films so far.

So, to continue this series of conversations, here is Dafna Yachin, director/producer/writer of Digital Dharma: One Man's Mission to Save a Culture.

Synopsis: When ancient writings of Sanskrit and Tibetan texts vanish during the political turmoil of the 1950s and 1960s, the history of a whole society is in danger of disappearing. Digital Dharma chronicles the 50-year journey of E. Gene Smith, a Mormon from Utah, the unlikely leader of an effort to rescue, preserve and share 20,000 volumes of ancient Tibetan text. This epic of one man's mission became the catalyst for an international movement to provide free access to the story of a people.

IDA: How did you get started in documentary filmmaking?

Dafna Yachin: Unlike many of the fantastic recent film school directors I am meeting at the festivals this year, I started as a field, then series and show, producer/director for both network and cable. I then worked my way into becoming a commercial film director and now chief creative officer for Lunchbox Communications. Lunchbox has always helped human rights nonprofit organizations tell stories cross-platform. And while we had grown into a marketing and branding firm, we all came from storytelling backgrounds and are compelled to help organizations and causes create epic films that would not be short-lived, but would last a lifetime to help record history and motivate an audience to action. 

IDA: What inspired you to make Digital Dharma?

DY: I met Tibetologist E. Gene Smith while doing a documentary short on Peter Gruber, a philanthropist who is credited for numerous accomplishments, including helping to facilitate one of the first English translations of many Tibetan books, 100,000 Songs of the Milarapa. I was told Gene had digitized thousands of 1,500-year-old Tibetan bats, though I was not sure what a Tibetologist did and was clueless as to what a Tibetan bat was. 

Over the next year, I ran into Gene several times at human rights events. I'd ask him how the digitization efforts were going and he'd tell me about some collection that was just realized in Mongolia, Bhutan or in the bowels of the Library of Congress right here in the US.  His passion was infectious. I kept picturing ancient texts locked away in crates on forklifts, like an Indiana Jones ending. I needed to get more of this quiet and humble, unlikely hero on camera.

In 2008 Gene gave us permission to follow him back to India and Nepal as he set out to deliver, to the main lamas of the four leading Buddhist traditions and the Bon, 12,000 digitized texts of the 20,000 that had been salvaged. These lamas had also spent their lives finding and preserving the texts lost during China's cultural revolution.

We wanted to be there when these spiritual leaders discovered that 1,500 years of history could fit into the palms of their hands.

With this feature film, I want viewers to quickly move from asking why to wanting to learn how: how Gene's ultimate mission of collecting, digitizing and distributing all the texts will be accomplished, and perhaps even how the viewers might become agents for accomplishing such a purpose in their own lives.

IDA: What were some of the challenges and obstacles in making this film, and how did you overcome them?

DY: First...Money. 

Second...Money.

Third...finding a way to translate a complex topic for a mainstream audience and distill 50 years of E. Gene Smith's mission and 1,500 years of Tibetan history into 82 minutes. 

The next challenge will be to create an online multimedia interactive platform to use all the many related stories and interviews that we could not fit in the film

IDA: How did your vision for the film change over the course of the pre-production, production and post-production processes?

DY: Gene Smith was so humble; he did not want this film to be about him. He wanted it to be about all the lamas, scholars and laypeople that he had worked with over his lifetime. We were originally going to make the film about the text-preservation efforts and the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center that Gene had founded. 

When Gene passed away suddenly during the making of this film, we lost a close friend, a mentor and the leading man. Everything changed.  

IDA: As you've screened Digital Dharma—whether on the festival circuit, or in screening rooms, or in living rooms—how have audiences reacted to the film? What has been most surprising or unexpected about their reactions?

DY: We had our first public pre-screenings at Sedona International Film Festival to an audience of over 350 people. Seeing a diverse collective group laugh with the lamas and then sob during the film's dramatic turning point finally had the Lunchbox team feeling that the last six months of focus groups and adjustments had been worth it. How we felt about this epic tale is how the audience felt about the film. They had learned about one of history's most important cultural salvations and were in awe of its catalyst. 

IDA: What docs or docmakers have served as inspirations for you

DY: Arnaud Desjardins, Robert Gardner and Barbara Atti.

Digital Dharma is currently screening August 10 through 16 at the Laemmle NoHo 7 in Los Angeles and will be screening August 17 through 23 at the IFC Center in New York City.

For the complete DocuWeeks^TM 2012 program, click here.

To purchase tickets for Digital Dharma in Los Angeles, click here.

To purchase tickets for Digital Dharma in New York, click here.

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks™ Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 3 through August 30 in New York City and Los Angeles. We asked the filmmakers to share the stories behind their films™the inspirations, the challenges and obstacles, the goals and objectives, the reactions to their films so far.

So, to continue this series of conversations, here is Nelson Cheng, director/producer of The Magic Life.

Synopsis: Three aspiring individuals try to turn their passion into a career. Can they pull off the biggest trick of their lives and become working magicians?

IDA: How did you get started as a documentary filmmaker?

Nelson Cheng: I had recently finished producing my first web series—it was the first time I ever produced anything and afterwards I just had more possibilities in my mind in terms of what was possible. I also recently had become a magician member of the Magic Castle. As I got to know more and more magicians, I thought there might be something there with business and magicians. I had this general idea when I met Seth Keal at Sundance after a screening of a documentary he produced (Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work)—he was both very encouraging and helpful. He literally sent me a listing of all the gear they used on Joan which I quickly replicated for The Magic Life.

IDA: In the director’s statement on your website, you mention that you wanted to tell a story about magicians because it’s such an uncommon career path. Do you identify with people who choose an unconventional route in life?

NC: Yes—but that wasn't why I started work on the film. I realize there are a lot of parallels to my own life, and perhaps subconsciously that's why I pursued it, but it certainly wasn’t something that I realized at the time. I just think that we spend so much time every day at work—it's literally the dominant portion of our waking hours—it just seems mind-boggling to me to not at least try and find and pursue a profession that you're passionate about. It's not the easiest of paths, but certainly seems like a worthwhile thing to pursue. I've had many dark nights wondering about what I was doing and whether I should be doing something else.

IDA: How did you find these three particular magicians? What made you choose to tell their stories?

NC: We found the first magician, Yang Yang, through a magician friend of mine. My friend had studied at a famous magic school called Chavez and Dale Salwak, who runs the school, had two students at the time—one of them being Yang Yang. I honestly had no idea what I was doing at the time, but there was something about Yang Yang's energy and presence that really captivated me. I just enjoyed spending time with him.

Another person who was involved in this film was Penny Falk (editor on Joan Rivers: A Piece of Work). She won the editing prize at Sundance for Joan. We shot a fair amount and Penny kindly looked at early footage. It wasn't even pieced together in any format; I just sent her segments that I found interesting. She gave me a lot of great feedback, but she also asked, "Who else do you have?" The first two people I mentioned were someone who had an MBA from NYU who had just moved to L.A. to pursue becoming a professional magician (Michael Friedland) and my friend who lived a block from the Magic Castle and performed on the street for tips (Matthew Noah Falk). Penny immediately said, "They sound interesting. You should follow them." So I did.

IDA: How did your vision of the project change over the course of production?

NC: The original conception was around the business side of being a magician—and I think we definitely examine and bring to the forefront an industry that a lot of people probably aren't familiar with. But on some level, the film ultimately takes the shape it was meant to take. I think I didn't anticipate seeing how much their lives would evolve and the depth of their struggles in pursuing this profession that they loved so much. I probably went into it with a much headier point of view and I personally felt like I learned a lot just from watching their journeys.

IDA: What were some of the challenges you faced when trying to make this film? How did you overcome those challenges?

NC: The main challenge is that I didn't know what I was doing. I knew that going in, but I said to myself, "Start filming and then figure out the problems." It's a tough way to go because [it's] brutal—but it's the fastest way to learn, and you end up with a film at the end of it. So I was constantly trying to figure out why something was wrong and who I could possibly ask to help me. I mentioned the absolute invaluable help that Seth and Penny provided at earlier stages of the film. Penny ultimately connected me with my editor, Erik Dugger (they had co-edited a film together), and he's very talented as an editor. I was so struck at how strong he was when it came to story. Ultimately, I know my role in the film—the film exists because of me. However, the film is (I think) a good film because of the collective efforts of folks like Seth, Penny, and Erik.

IDA: As you’ve screened The Magic Life, how have people reacted to the film?

NC: People were more engaged than I expected them to be. We premiered at Nashville and at our second screening, the organizer who introduced us noted how normally a third or more of the crowd doesn't stay for the Q&A but that nearly everyone stayed after our first screening. Also, I found the audience questions particularly thoughtful—they were both quite engaged with the individual stories and also brought out larger themes. I've had numerous people come up to me mentioning that they have dreams of their own that they'd like to pursue.

IDA Now that your film is playing DocuWeeks and making the rounds at festivals, what’s next for you?

NC: I'm continuing to produce more project—so far I've produced 3 web series, a short film, and The Magic Life. I've been bouncing around ideas for new documentaries and have been considering optioning a Vanity Fair article that I found particularly compelling. It's hard to say though—I like to have a lot of ideas, do a lot of research, move quickly. Ultimately, I only move because something within me drives me to work on something.

The Magic Life will be screening August 10 through 16 at the IFC Center in New York City, and August 17 through the 23 at Laemmle NoHo 7 in Los Angeles.

Complete DocuWeeks™ 2012 program

Purchase tickets for The Magic Life in New York

Purchase tickets for The Magic Life in Los Angeles

Authentic Entertainment has again signed on to be a Silver Sponsor of the 28th annual IDA Documentary Awards. Returning as a sponsor after their stint as first-time sponsors last year, Authentic joins ABC News Video Source, Focus Forward, Sony, Stella Artois, The Standard and the American Film Showcase to support this annual fundraiser which celebrates outstanding achievements in documentary filmmaking. We are proud to welcome Authentic, which consistently produces award-winning non-fiction projects and television programming.

Authentic Entertainment co-founder Lauren Lexton had this to say about the partnership:

"Authentic Entertainment is proud to support the IDA and looking forward to the upcoming IDA Awards. Showcasing these powerful and important films and the dedicated film makers who make them, helps spread the passion for story that we at Authentic work everyday to promote."

If you are interested in supporting the IDA Documentary Awards by becoming a sponsor, please contact Cindy Chyr at cindy@documentary.org or call (213) 534-3600 x7400.

Download the Awards Sponsorship Package to learn more about how you or your organization can help support this important event for the documentary community.