If you're thinking of applying to the Cal Humanities California Documentary Project Grant, it's time to get started! Check out their upcoming informational grant workshops in San Diego, San Francisco and Los Angeles, or take advantage of the webinar on Tuesday, August 28th from 10:30am - noon. We'll be at the Los Angeles workshop on September 5th so if you're there make sure to say hello! The grant deadline is October 1, 2012 at 5pm.  Learn more>>

Mel Stuart, whose career in film and television spanned nearly six decades and 150 films, died Thursday at his home in Los Angeles at 83. The cause was cancer, as his daughter Madeline Stuart told the Associated Press.

While Stuart will always be best known for the classic 1971 feature Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, his documentary canon was prodigious. His Making of the President series, which covered the US presidential campaigns of 1960, 1964 and 1968, earned him an Emmy for the 1960 installment. He earned an Academy Award nomination for Best Documentary Feature  for his 1965 film Four Days in November. His 1973 film Wattstaxx, about a music festival featuring some of the greatest R&B artists of the time, takes a scintillating look at the state of Black America in the early 1970s, through the brilliant perspective of comedian Richard Pryor, making his cinematic debut. Stuart made profiles of artist Man Ray and filmmaker Billy Wilder for the PBS series American Masters, and one of his last documentaries, The Hobart Shakespearians, aired in PBS' POV in 2005 and was selected among the films in the US State Department-sponsored American Documentary Showcase, a cultural diplomacy program that toured to 50 countries around the world from 2009 through 2011. In recognition of the breadth and depth of his work, Stuart was honored with the IDA Pioneer Award in 2003.

Stuart was also one of the founding members of the International Documentary Association, and served as its Board President in 1994 and 1995. In the early 2000s, he and attorney Michael Donaldson spearheaded the Documentary Credits Coalition, working with cable giants Discovery Communications, National Geographic and Scripps to persuade them to improve their credit roll on their aired programs. And throughout his career, Stuart always dedicated himself to giving back as a mentor to scores of documentary filmmakers, following the example of his mentor, the late great television magnate David Wolper.    

Here are some more articles about Mel Stuart from the Documentary archives:

2003 Pioneer Award

Wattstax

The Hobart Shakespearians

For an appreciation by filmmaker David Vassar, click here.

In an IDA interview with filmmaker Linda Goldstein Knowlton, she discusses the making of her most recent film, Somewhere Between. Like many filmmakers over the past few years, Goldstein Knowlton used a Kickstarter campaign as part of her fundraising strategy. She shares her experience with us -- not to mention giving the Fiscal Sponsorship Program a shout out! Here is an excerpt from the interview:

IDA: What was your experience like using Kickstarter to help finance your film?

Linda Goldstein Knowlton: First, a huge shout-out for the IDA's Fiscal Sponsorship Program, without which I would not be talking to you right now; having that fiscal sponsorship made the film possible, so I'm truly, truly grateful for the sponsorship program through the IDA. We used Kickstarter to raise money for theatrical distribution, which starts August 24 in New York and September 14 in Los Angeles. Kickstarter was also a godsend, with the sense of community that I felt of people spreading the word and commenting and strangers commenting to strangers and saying thank you. We had an angel come in before the 11th hour who helped us reach our goal. I was asleep when that happened, so I woke up to all of these e-mails and alerts from Kickstarter because all of these people on the East Coast had seen that this angel had brought us over the top. All of these strangers e-mailed messages of thank you to this person and that was awesome, just such a great feeling. It made the process fantastic.

As she points out, using a targeted Kickstarter or IndieGoGo campaign to raise funds that support a specific stage of your film can be advantageous. You might run a campaign for the production phase, and/or a separate campaign for distribution like Linda did. Although this isn't the best strategy for everyone, it's worth giving some thought, as it may make things seem more achievable -- for you, and your donors.

Read the whole interview and find out more about Somewhere Between.

It might be tempting to think that if you write a check to a grant writer you can check out of the process and focus on making your film while the funds pour in. The reality is that when you're selling your own creative vision, ceding all of the grant writing responsibility isn’t necessarily possible or advisable. Hiring outside help may be the right choice for your project but there are a few things to consider before handing over the fundraising reigns:

The argument for DIY

There are a few strong arguments in favor or writing your own grant proposals whenever possible. First, when it’s your passion and artistic vision it’s unlikely that anyone else can sell it like you can.  Filtering your creative vision through someone else’s voice can end up diluting it.

Also keep in mind that if you are applying to a documentary specific grant, it’s likely that your peers will make up a significant part of any review panel. There is no need to fill your writing with “grant-speak” or jargon. Plain language and a clear vision are far more likely to impress.

And finally, over the course of a career in filmmaking, investing in the skills necessary to feel confident doing grant research and writing yourself may pay off significantly in the long run. Consider looking into organizations that offer introductory classes on grant research and writing. We've linked to a few at the end of this article.

The pros for a professional

There is no question that writing a grant proposal takes time and skill. For an independent filmmaker wearing many hats, time is sometimes the harder of the two to come by. While you might struggle to find the time to work on a grant, hiring a professional will guarantee that someone will make it a priority to get the job done on schedule. An experienced writer will bring not only the time to focus exclusively on crafting a proposal, but the organizational skills to execute it efficiently.

A skilled grant writer will also write in a language that funders understand and respond to. This can be especially beneficial when dealing with foundations outside of the film world. If you’re reaching out to funders unaccustomed to making grants to documentary or media projects, an experienced grant professional may be able to help you convince a funder that your film is an innovative way to reach new audiences and further it’s mission.  

A middle road

Another idea to consider is using a professional writer as an editor after writing the first draft of a proposal yourself.  Presumably you have a boilerplate proposal after applying to fiscal sponsorship so doing the bulk of the grunt work and then hiring a professional to work with you to edit and polish your work has advantages.

A great editor will offer a fresh perspective and help you find your own voice. If you go this route meeting with a writer before getting started to come up with a plan and working outline is likely a good investment and may save you time and money by avoiding the need for restructuring down the road. Work out a schedule early so you and the writer are both clear on a timeline and delivery expectations.

Tips for working with a grant writer:

• Get referrals from your fellow filmmakers, then ask for and check references! Ask not just about the writer’s skills and experience but also about how they work. Writing a grant proposal will be a collaborative process so a positive working relationship is essential.
• Find out what information and materials they will need from you and when. Once someone is on the clock you’ll want to maximize impact by coming prepared with everything they need to get started. Work together on a timeline that covers the entire process, step-by-step, right up to delivery of the final proposal.
• How familiar are they with documentary and with the arts/media funding landscape?  Documentary filmmakers who have had success with their own funding proposals sometimes run side businesses helping other filmmakers. Finding someone with both grant writing and documentary experience will make for less of a learning curve.
• How much do they charge and what is the schedule for payments? Grant writers will typically charge either a flat fee or more commonly, an hourly rate for researching and writing a proposal. We’ve heard quotes anywhere from about $30 an hour, up to hundreds of dollars an hour for more complex proposals and government grants. An experienced writer should be able to give you an estimate up front of the approximate number of hours they think will be required to both research and write your proposal.
• Don’t be afraid to plead your case and ask for the starving artist discount but don’t expect to pay a writer a percentage of funds raised after the fact. Foundations frown on conditional percentage based payment arrangements and just about all the major grant writing and fundraising membership organizations consider them unethical. While you may luck out and find someone so passionate about your project that they will defer payment or cut you a deal, you should plan on paying a professional writer for all the time they work on an application, whether the proposal is successfully funded or not.

Editor's Note: Kings Point is nominated for an IDA Documentary Award in the Short category. The folloiwing is an interview with director/producer Sari Gilman when the film was screened in IDA's DocuWeeks.  

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 Sari Gilman, director/producer of Kings Point.

Synopsis: Director Sari Gilman tells the stories of five seniors living in a typical American retirement resort--men and women who came to Florida decades ago with their spouses by their sides and their health intact, and now find themselves grappling with love, loss and the prospect of dying alone. A bittersweet look at our national obsession with self-reliance, Kings Point explores the dynamic tension between living and aging-between our desire for independence and our need for community-and underscores our powerful ambivalence toward growing old.

IDA: How did you get started in documentary filmmaking?

Sari Gilman: I studied still photography in college and did an oral history project for my senior thesis. This evolved into an interest in filmmaking. After college I worked for a company that created the motion graphics application After Effects. (This was before we were bought by Adobe, and the company was comprised of about 10 friends from college.). After working there for a few years, I moved to San Francisco, and with my understanding of digital video at a very early time in its history, I started freelancing as an assistant editor. Little by little, I gained experience working on documentaries, as an assistant and associate editor, and then I worked my way up to editor. I produced a couple of radio documentaries, but this is my first film as a director.

IDA: What inspired you to make Kings Point?

SG: My grandmother lived in Kings Point for 30 years, and I visited her regularly from the age of 9. I was always fascinated by what looked like summer camp for old people. She and her friends had what was advertised as an "active retirement"-playing cards, going to shows, swimming, playing tennis, etc. But as my grandmother and her friends began to age, I noticed a shift in how they were relating to each other. Increasingly unable to participate in community life, the conversations between friends seemed to be about doctor's appointments more than mahjong. There was almost a Darwinian aspect to social life: You were popular if you were healthy. If you were not, people stopped coming by. I began to hear whispers at the pool: "Oh, yeah, Ida...she's going down."

After two decades of visiting my grandmother and getting to know her friends and neighbors, I wanted to learn more about this uniquely American community. I began interviewing residents and discovered that they felt safe talking to me about issues they didn't feel comfortable bringing up with their neighbors. I was a young person, a filmmaker, in many ways an outsider-yet I had grown up among them  and was deeply connected to their culture.

Ten years later, their stories have evolved into a film. It is their lives and their voices that, for me, have come to represent the universal longing for human connection, and the complexities of aging in a society that extols the virtue of self-reliance.

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

SG: Typical challenges, like raising enough money to shoot, were huge. Also, I work as film editor and am frequently working on other people's films for long stretches of time, which takes up a lot of creative energy.

Frankly, though, I found it kind of depressing to go down there, and I didn't always enjoy the production process.

Another challenge was trying to find the right balance of "light," funny material and the more dark and thoughtful material. There was a lot of "cute old people" material (people dancing and playing cards, etc.), but I found a lot of that material to be cliché, so I wound up cutting a lot of that.

IDA: You dedicated your film to your grandmother, although she doesn't appear in the film. How instrumental was she in helping to get her friends to open up to you? Did she share her friends' observations about aging, love, friendship and family?  

SG: I actually did a couple of shoots with my grandmother and toyed with the idea of making the film more personal. But it really was not the right tone.

I didn't film many of my grandmother's friends, and she didn't really talk in a particularly self-reflective way about her experience there (which was another reason I didn't want to film her). But I could just see what was going on even if she didn't talk about it. That was the thing: nobody talked about that stuff to each other. That's why I think they opened up to me so much. They needed to talk about these things but none of their peers were interested in hearing about it.

Staying with my grandmother while I was shooting actually made things difficult in the sense that I always felt bad about not spending more time with her while I was there working. Of course she supported me and what I was doing, but I think she would have liked it if I had been home more.

IDA: Based on seeing the film, I'd guess that you made this film over a period of at least five years--two years pass in the story and at least another three pass in post-production. Did you intend to follow this community over a period of years? At what point did you determine that you had gotten your story and you were ready to start editing?

SG: It actually took me 10 years to complete the film, and no, I had no idea I would be doing it for so long. I didn't stop shooting until I thought I had enough character development to sustain a film. Because I am an editor, I had a pretty good idea of when I did not have enough.

Once I got the financing to complete the film and hire another editor (Jeffrey Friedman), I was actually planning to do one more shoot to wrap things up. But in the editing room, we decided we really didn't need to.

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

SG: When I started filming, my approach was a little anthropological in that there was nothing specific that I was looking for; I really just wanted to talk to these people. Even though I could relate to the residents, I was outside of their experience. It was only towards the end of the production process that I began to see myself in all the characters.

Who hasn't been like Gert, calling someone on Saturday night trying to find someone to do something with? Or like Bea, flirting with someone from whom she is never going to get what she wants. And even Frank, who is staying in a relationship that isn't giving him everything he wants, but it's better than nothing.

I began to see the subjects as not just "old" people, but human beings with the same struggles and challenges we all have.

IDA: As you've screened Kings Point—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?

SG: People are generally moved. I have found that the older the viewer, the more difficult the film is to watch. Of course that is a generalization, but I think people spend a lot of energy trying not to think about the issues the film addresses, and I think the film challenges people to think about them.

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

SG: Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman—they are amazing storytellers. Kristine Samuelson and John Haptas—their new film Tokyo Waka is gorgeous.

Kings Point will be screening August 3 through 9 at the IFC Center in New York City.

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

To purchase tickets for Kings Point and the rest of the films in the DocuWeeks New York Shorts Program for Week 1, 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 launch this series of conversations, here is Finlay Pretsell, co-director/co-producer, with Adrian McDowall, of Cutting Loose.

Synopsis: Hairdressers poised, scissors at the ready, clients in place. Cutting begins. The salon looks familiar enough, chatter rising above the chopping and blow-drying, but the hairdressers have something in common: They're all serving time in Scotland's jails. Cutting Loose provides a fascinating snapshot of prison life during the build-up to the annual Scottish Prison Service hairdressing competition. As the competition approaches, we hear the dreams and aspirations of some of Scotland's most dangerous prisoners as they style the hair of fellow inmates on a daily basis.

IDA:  How did you get started in documentary filmmaking?

Finlay Pretsell: By mistake, really. Purely by chance in a way. I started working for Scottish Documentary Institute, then I worked at the university, which had a strong film and TV department (Edinburgh College of Art). I then met Adrian McDowall, and we talked about making films. We had such a similar taste and vibe for the films we wanted to make; that was back in 2007.  I was—and still am—really into cycling, and I wanted to make a film about how cycling felt. With Adrian we realized this; the result was Standing Start, our first collaboration.

IDA: What inspired you to make Cutting Loose?

FP: For me, when I heard a radio documentary on Radio Scotland about the hairdressing competition day, it felt like pure cinema to me—such a visually interesting place, subject, characters, etc. One thing I couldn't get out of my head was the scissor board: It had the outlines of the scissors like a tool board in a workshop or a children's set of toys—very visual. It's featured in the film, very briefly. There was so much more I wanted to discover about the lives of these prisoners and where they'd come from and what their plans were for outside. Doesn't everyone want to find out what it's actually like in a jail?! I loved the idea of the tenderness between inmates, the care they take on each other's hair and the creativity in hairstyling. It felt like a pure escape from the daily jail.

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

FP: Working with and around characters is always very challenging, but working within the constraints of a prison made it so much more complicated. The Scottish Prison Service was really accommodating with our requests; it was up to each individual establishment on how and when we got access to film. But of course we could have done with more time in the jail with the inmates. But in some ways that will always be the case with making films.

IDA: Francis is the protagonist of the story—although we do meet other inmates. But did you interview any prison wardens or administrators?

FP: We had never intended to interview any of the prisoner officers or any other staff. Halfway through there was one man that we wanted to interview; he had such a unique take on what he was doing, he really cared about and was close to these men. It never happened in the end, and I have no idea where it would have fit anyway. As soon as we met Francis, though, we knew he was our man; he embraced what we were trying to do, and he was the perfect vessel in which to tell the story, as he was so open to the process. He was also a lot like us in many ways; we got on very well. 

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

FP: There was so much that changed, we stuck as close as possible to our vision where we could. For example, we never intended to film outside the prison walls initially, but when Francis said he was due for release during our filming, we had to find a way. While I personally didn't like the cliché of a happy ending, the release was just that, so we really wanted to find another way to end his story. He always talked so fondly of his Mum; she always stood by him so strongly. Of course, she always had her hair cut by him when he was out of prison. The tenderness between them is quite palpable. We always wanted to spend more time with the characters to really get to know them and get deeper into their stories, but due to time constraints and of course the prison system, we couldn't quite do this as much as we'd have liked.

IDA: As you've screened Cutting Loose—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?

FP: The response has been great. I've been in the audience with Francis in Edinburgh and in Toronto at Hot Docs, and people laugh and feel the emotion equally well. I'll never forget when we first showed the film to Francis, his Mum and another couple of members of his family in their living room. All they did was talk all the way through and point out people they knew in the film. I'm not sure they listened to the film to really take it in. The second time in the cinema was different, though, and I think it really hit home that other people had this window into their lives. They loved it, though, and so did we to share it with them.  

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

FP: Werner Herzog (most of his films, doc and fiction), Michael Glawogger (Workingman's Death), Douglas Gordon (Zidane: A 21st Century Portrait), Maysles brothers (Gimme Shelter), and Peter Liechti (The Sound of Insects: Portrait of a Mummy) all serve as huge inspirations, among many others.

Cutting Loose will be screening August 3 through 9 at the IFC Center in New York City.

For the complete DocuWeeks™ 2012 program, click here.

To purchase tickets for Cutting Loose and the rest of the films in the DocuWeeks New York Shorts Program for Week 1, 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 launch this series of conversations, here is Martin Smith, director of Jimmy.

Synopsis: A day in the life of Jimmy McIntosh, MBE, who has tirelessly campaigned for disabled rights since 1972. An incredibly intimate portrait told from Jimmy's point of view, a wheelchair-bound cerebral palsy sufferer. Nothing stands in Jimmy's way.

IDA: How did you get started in documentary filmmaking?

Martin Smith: I had done a few experimental documentary films--all shot on Super 8--but I couldn't get my head around how I would shoot a documentary in the same way I approach my drama films: getting a strong point-of-view insight into a unique character's world. It wasn't until I met Jimmy and had the idea for the film that I thought I'd be able to make a documentary that was in keeping with the spirit of my drama work. I guess it was all about finding the right subject--someone whose story drew me in.

IDA: What inspired you to make Jimmy?

MS: I was shooting a short film and one of the locations was my local community center. Jimmy ran one of the groups there--a support network for adults with learning difficulties and disabilities. I was introduced to Jimmy and got speaking to him about his life and his story. I was amazed by what he had been through--40 years institutionalised because of his disability. In those days, people with Jimmy's condition (cerebral palsy) were institutionalised and were considered “Mentally Deficient” despite having no learning difficulties whatsoever. The treatment of the patients was at times really brutal. I was shocked by his stories, but more importantly I was inspired by what he did about it: He fought for, and won, the vote for the institutionalised disabled, a right that had been denied to them. I saw Jimmy as a modern-day Emmeline Pankhurst or Nelson Mandela, and what amazed me was that so few people really even knew about him. That was something I was keen to change.

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

MS: Initially the challenge was earning Jimmy's trust. I knew Jimmy was happy for me to film him at work; he's really confident and comfortable in public, but I quickly realised that if I wanted a full insight into his life ,I'd need to get into his home and his relationship with his partner, Elisabeth. Jimmy was understandably protective of her, so I had to prove to Jimmy, through the process of spending time with him and following him as he went around his daily business, that I wanted to give a real insight and that my motives were going to be right and for the best of the film. In earning trust there is an exchange. I give something of myself and in doing that I got something from Jimmy. It made the filming process much richer for me, I got to know someone deeply, over the course of six months. I feel incredibly fortunate for having had the experience.

Also, through the making of the film, I got to understand some of the huge challenges that are faced by wheelchair users; it had quite a profound effect on me. Having shot the film over the course of a Scottish winter, we had the issue of snow. I couldn't have imagined how much of an effect this could have had on someone like Jimmy. He was housebound for a couple of weeks, so I'd go over to his home, and actually it was a lovely period for me. I really got to know Jimmy well through that time; I even dug out his driveway when the snow got really bad. The snow presented continuity issues; it disappeared as quickly as it arrived. One night in late December I saw the snow falling again and called up Jimmy--was it snowing where he was? He looked out his window-- yep! I drove over there and we went out and shot another sequence when we could get the chance. It was a real collaboration in that sense.

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

MS: Initially I was going to shoot a conventional observational documentary, and all my research shooting was lensed in that way, but Jimmy's story was so unique that we had a conversation about how we could elevate it, whether the shooting style had to be something more. I was always planning to take a day-in-the-life style format because from the very first time I met him. I saw he covered so much ground in a single day-- campaign meetings, electioneering, consultancy work with various organizations--and he has an active and varied social life. The key was going to be how to capture that in a satisfying narrative.

I asked Jimmy about how he felt about the point-of-view style and he was happy to try it. Once I saw the first footage I found it very powerful; I felt it almost put me in his body. So we went with that, and I found myself acting as Jimmy's eyes for the next six months, trying to harness his unique physicality.

I edited as I went along. If the footage worked, it stayed in the timeline; if it didn't, I questioned why that was and often returned to reshoot sequences. Finlay Pretsell, my producer at the Scottish Documentary Institute, would come round and see the edit and we'd chat about where the story was going. I felt I had the main body of the film nailed quite early on, maybe two months into filming, but coming close to my deadline, there was a key element I knew I needed to get. From time to time Jimmy would make campaign speeches, and I hadn't been around to get one of these. I didn't feel like I had a full insight into his life without hearing him speak about where he came from and the campaigns he fought. Fortunately, about a week before shooting ended, I filmed Jimmy as he gave one of these speeches. For me it was one of the most powerful moments in the film.

IDA: As you’ve screened Jimmy--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?

MS: When I first saw the film in a cinema, I thought to myself, “What have I done?” The POV style was so intense, I wasn't sure what I had made, and if it was a complete disaster. It wasn't until audience members came up to me and told me how much it moved them that I thought I'd have to let it settle. It probably wasn't until I had seen it screened three or four times that I recognized it as the film we made.

There have been quite a few audience members in tears, and I can understand why; Jimmy's story is really moving. People often come up to me afterwards and tell me how much it moved them. That's incredibly rewarding as a filmmaker, particularly as this is a film I wanted to make so I could give an insight into a life that I thought was truly remarkable. But if Jimmy had hated it, I would have been completely traumatized. Thankfully there were big smiles, and a few tears from him when he saw himself on the cinema screen. People are drawn to him, he gets so much attention. I'm really delighted by that.

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

MS: Albert Maysles is really one of my cinematic heroes. I first saw Salesmen and Meet Marlon Brando on a worn-out VHS many years ago. At that point I never even understood what the term documentary actually meant. Where I came from, I never knew people could be documentary filmmakers. I was lucky enough to visit Al when I was last in New York and headed up to the Maysles Films office. It was like spending time with a hero. What an amazing guy; he's not only an innovator in his field, you feel the empathy he has for his participants in every frame of his work. I love all his films, even his commercials.

One of the first documentary films that I saw in a cinema was Steve James' Hoop Dreams. I'm a big fan of films that deal with a social concern, and I hadn't seen an insight into that life before. I'm always on the lookout for a subject in real life that will trigger a similar response in me and inspire me to pick up the camera again.

Jimmy will be screening August 3 through 9 at the IFC Center in New York City.

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

To purchase tickets for Jimmy and the rest of the films in the DocuWeeks New York Shorts Program for Week 1, 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 launch this series of conversations, here are Mike and Tim Rauch, co-directors of StoryCorps Animated Shorts Eyes on the Stars, Facundo the Great, and Sundays at Rocco's.

Synopses:

Eyes on the Stars: Carl McNair tells the story of his brother Ronald, an African-American kid in the 1950s who set his sights on the stars.

Facundo the Great: Ramòn "Chunky" Sanchez recounts how the new kid at school became a hero when his name stumped their teachers.

Sundays at Rocco's: Nicholas Petron remembers family dinners at his grandfather's place and how everything changed when the city made new plans for their neighborhood.

IDA: How did you get started working with StoryCorps?

Mike Rauch: I was originally an intern at StoryCorps, which is actually when my brother Tim and I started the very first StoryCorps short, Germans in the Woods.

Tim Rauch: While Mike was interning, he told me he had talked to StoryCorps about animating some of their radio broadcasts. At first I didn’t think it would work, but as I listened to more StoryCorps recordings, I saw that animation could really add a new dimension to these stories. We initially planned to do just one short, but when we finished Germans in the Woods we realized that we had something compelling and we wanted to work on more stories.

IDA: What inspires you most about directing these shorts for StoryCorps?

TR: The most inspiring people I’ve known in my life have been the subjects of these StoryCorps shorts. Eyes On The Stars is a perfect example. Ron McNair, an African American, grew up poor in segregated, rural South Carolina, but through his perseverance and intelligence made an extraordinary impact on American life. He became an MIT physicist and the second African American astronaut to fly into space. Ultimately he lost his life in the Challenger disaster. A local library that turned young Ron away because of the color of his skin is now a museum in his honor and sits on a boulevard bearing his name.

MR: Working with these stories is a constant reminder of how extraordinary the lives of everyday people are. It's been great discovering just how much we all share in common and how truly amazing life can be.

IDA: It sounds like average Americans come in to record their stories, and you work with the recorded piece to develop an animation. Can you describe your process in a little more detail?

MR: StoryCorps records the stories of everyday Americans all across the country. When we receive the edited audio recording from StoryCorps, which airs first as a broadcast on NPR, we begin by doing intensive research. We visit the storytellers whenever possible, gather family photos, take snapshots of relevant landmarks, and collect whatever other research is needed. That research comes back into the studio and is used to help design the characters and create a storyboard.

When the character design and storyboard are finalized, things start coming to life through animation and background layouts for the various environments. It's always really exciting to see it come together when we add color to the characters and backgrounds at the very end. When everything is finished, all the pieces of the film get composited in AfterEffects and we have the final video.

TR: Because these are cartoons, there is some imagining we have to do along the way, but building everything on that foundation of research at the beginning helps keep things authentic and true to the real story.

IDA: What are some of the challenges you encounter when you are storyboarding the animations to go along with these recordings? How do you overcome those challenges?

TR: Because these shorts are both documentary and cartoon, it's always a balancing act of letting the animation be both naturalistic and more cartoony. We try to use both ends of the spectrum—in design and in the acting—to help tell the story in the best way possible. Our guide for that balance is always character and story. If a subtler feature animation approach works best in a given scene, we go for that. If a more humorous TV cartoon sensibility serves the next scene better, we're not shy about using that either.

IDA: Who are some other individuals working in the animation documentary field who have inspired you in your work?

MR: The 1980's series Lip Synch by UK studio Aardman Animations was an early influence that got us interested in telling real-life stories through animation. But some of our biggest inspirations probably come from Saturday morning cartoons. The design of the StoryCorps shorts owes a lot to classic American TV shows like The Flintstones, Rocky & Bullwinkle, or even Ren & Stimpy. Those cartoons were built around characters first and foremost, and the StoryCorps shorts are also very character-driven. We've learned a lot about creating memorable characters on screen by looking at cartoon classics.

TR: We're also drawing a lot of inspiration from animation of the 1940's and 1950's in general, and in specific the UPA studio. One particular director from UPA, John Hubley, was an early inspiration for the StoryCorps animation. He directed the 1959 Academy Award-winning Moonbird, which was built around actual recordings of his children playing. He did an amazing job of taking advantage of animation to really push the story and character development beyond the audio itself. We always look for ways to do that with StoryCorps, and John Hubley gives us a high bar to reach for.

IDA: What do you hope to get out of the inclusion of these three films in DocuWeeks?

MR: We're looking forward to watching these films with a theater audience. They're mainly seen on TV as part of POV, the PBS documentary program, or online. We really love connecting with audiences in those forums, but it's rare that we get to watch the StoryCorps shorts with a live audience. There's always something to learn from the immediate response in a theater, and it's great to have such a direct connection with the people watching.

TR: We're also thrilled to have these shorts included along with so many other great films that explore the human condition. We hope all three StoryCorps shorts will add a new dimension to the complex narrative about our modern world, as depicted in all the films playing together at DocuWeeks.

StoryCorps Animated Shorts will be screening August 3 through 9 at the IFC Center in New York City.

Complete DocuWeeks™ 2012 program

To purchase tickets for Eyes on the Stars, Facundo the Great, Sundays at Roccos, and the rest of the films in the DocuWeeks New York Shorts Program for Week 1, 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 launch this series of conversations, here is Tali Yankelevich, director of The Perfect Fit.

Synopsis: Ballet shoes may be worn by delicate girls, but they're crafted by big burly men whose hands tell another story.

IDA: How did you get started in non-fiction filmmaking?

Tali Yankelevich: The truth is I actually didn’t know much about documentaries when I went on to study filmmaking. I was 19 years old when I enrolled in a Media Foundation course in London where I got to try a few different audiovisual media, and I guess it became a case of natural selection. I hadn’t seen many documentaries at that age; all my reference came from fiction films. I soon realized I had really no talent for fiction. I wasn’t any good at writing or creating situations, but I did truly enjoy observing. And so I was instantly drawn to the documentary practice and its process.

IDA: What inspired you to make The Perfect Fit?

TY: I was trained in classical ballet and danced for 10 years when I was growing up, so I always wanted to make a film on the subject. I felt the right approach never came to me. So many films are made about dance and ballet and I didn’t want to make just one more.

The idea for the film came from an article I found on the Internet about a pointe shoe factory in London. Reading that article was to me a complete shock, as I had danced in pointe shoes for so long and it never occurred to me where they actually came from. I think I probably had a picture in my mind of a little shoe coming out of a machine or something like that.

I read that the shoes where completely handmade, from beginning to end, that they were made of paper and glue, and that a shoemaker would glue layer after layer together to make the shoe hard enough to support the feet of a dancer. And each principle dancer had her one shoemaker who would craft her handmade shoes for her whole career. At the end of the article I remember reading a quote from one of the cobblers, who said, "The dancer should feel the soul of the shoemaker in the shoes." I then knew there was a film here, and I guess because of my experience with dance this felt really moving. To me the shoes were like an instrument of torture and caused me so much pain, but it was a contradiction as I loved dancing. So in this moment I could see that there was a story to be told between those two worlds.

I also thought the idea of this mysterious kind of bond between the dancer and the maker was so interesting and very cinematic even. I completely fell in love with the idea of a story, which could explore the parallelism of the lives of those two characters. So this became my door back into ballet and to making The Perfect Fit.

IDA: How did you get in touch with Denise The Dancer and Patrick The Shoemaker?

TY: I met Denise through a place in Edinburgh called Dance Base. I was looking for professional dancers and one of their teachers put me in contact with her. Denise is a very successful and experienced dancer who had been dancing all her life—she started her career in professional ballet companies at a very early age. I was particularly interested in those early years. On one of our first meetings she told me stories about her transition from being a student to becoming a professional dancer that were extremely moving. Much of the voice-over in the film was recorded in one of those early meetings. It is a very complex universe, the ballet, and Denise verbalized it in quite a memorable way.

With Patrick it was quite a different encounter. I met him during my first visit to Freed of London, the ballet shoe factory. I went there to shot some footage for a trailer. I was there with a friend and we had a limited time at the factory as it was quite a busy season for them. We were given a tour around the factory and I can say we were completely overwhelmed with what we saw. Everything there was just so visual and full of character. The workers there also were so warm and extremely friendly. I can remember every second of that visit so well; everywhere I looked was just filled with incredible details. I could have spent hours and hours there filming and not wanting to go home.

While we had a walk around, one of the shoemakers really grabbed my attention. This was Patrick. Can we say 'love at first sight' about a documentary character? This is how I felt. There was an incredible energy in the way he worked and made his shoes that was hypnotizing to watch. He almost looked like he was dancing—there was a rhythm and a fascinating synchronization in his movements and how he worked. His face was also so full of expression. We were observing how he worked and he spontaneously started talking to my friend and I. We filmed I think a conversation of around 20 min which was also so strong that at the end much of the film is built around this conversation.

IDA: How did your vision for the film change over the course of the production process?

TY: My original vision for the film was to work with a dancer at the start of her career. When young dancers enter companies, this is time when they start looking for the perfect shoe for them [and start to have them] custom made. So I though it would be an interesting moment to capture in relation to the shoe making world too. I was interested in establishing a strong direct relationship between the cobbler and a dancer. However, this was really impossible in terms of production. I had very limited time, therefore it just wasn’t possible to get permission to film in a ballet company.

But at the end it all worked out really well. Denise wasn’t dancing in a company at the time we met but there was a strong emotional journey in how she remembered and talked about the early years of her career. So it really ended up being 'a perfect fit' alongside Patrick’s story.

IDA: What documentaries or documentary filmmakers have inspired you?

TY: So many! [It] would be difficult to name them all. But I guess I can name two masters, whose films I feel I will never stop learning from. Sergei Dvortsevoy and Victor Kossakovsky are two filmmakers I truly admire. There is an incredible depth to every single moment in their films, to me they are able to explore something quite unique in their filmmaking; every shot has a life of its own that even transcends the narrative. There is a fascinating energy to the way they film their subjects. Their work carries so much poetry and an incredible sense of humanity.

IDA: What do you hope to get out of your participation in DocuWeeks?

TY: Well, I have to say this is an extraordinary event for me. When I finished this film I never in a million years imagined it would travel so much, and that it would be seen by so many people. Getting a week[long] theatrical release is something that probably won’t happen many times in the course of my career. I feel extremely lucky to have a short film screening at DocuWeeks. I currently reside in Brazil so I wont be in NYC, but I really hope that audiences enjoy the film, and that hopefully it will present them with a take into the ballet universe that they haven’t seen before.

The Perfect Fit will be screening August 3 through 9 at the IFC Center in New York City.

Complete DocuWeeks™ 2012 program

To purchase tickets for The Perfect Fit and the rest of the films in the DocuWeeks New York Shorts Program for Week 1, click here.

Enigmatic French filmmaker Chris Marker died at age 91 at home in Paris this past Sunday, the same day as his 91st birthday. Often considered on par with Jean-Luc Godard and Alain Resnais and as a master of the avant-garde, Marker is responsible for La Jetee, a pioneering science fiction film considered by some to be the greatest achievement in the genre to date.

Over the length of his six-decade career, Marker produced over two dozen films including the documentaries A Grin without A Cat (1977) and Chats Perchés (2004). Known for creating his films in the style of essays, Marker uses A Grin without A Cat to interview important French leaders of the time to shine a light on the political upheaval permeating the world in the 1960s and 70s. His later non-fiction work Chats Perchés looks at M. Chat, the graffiti cat that started appearing around France in the late 1990s. He is also responsible for co-creating Far from Vietnam (1967) with his contemporaries Godard and Resnais, which express their strong views against American involvement in the Vietnam War.

After the announcement of his death, Los Angeles Times speculated about Marker’s early life:

Little is known about Marker's life, which apparently was just as the filmmaker, who called himself "the best-known author of unknown movies," wanted it.

Most biographies say he was born Christian François Bouche-Villeneuve in Neuilly sur Seine, France, on July 29, 1921, and studied philosophy with Jean-Paul Sartre in the late 1930s. It may be apocryphal, but some sources say his affection for the Magic Marker felt-tipped pen inspired him to change his last name.

Doubts also surrounded his birthplace. Marker told film historian Thomson during a meeting in Berkeley in the 1980s that Thomson's "Biographical Dictionary of Film" was in error and that he actually was born in Ulan Bator, Mongolia.

Few images of Chris Marker exist, as noted by The Guardian: "Throughout his career, Marker, who was notoriously secretive about his private life, was rarely interviewed or photographed, often responding to requests for his photograph with a picture of a cat – his favourite animal."

Read our review of a DVD reissue of A Grin without a Cat from our Summer 2009 online issue.