Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks^TM Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 12 through September 1 in New York City and August 19 through September 8 in 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 Maggie Betts, director/producer of The Carrier.

Synopsis: Told through the eyes of an increasingly empowered heroine, The Carrier is a powerful and moving portrait of an unconventional family, set against the backdrop of the growing HIV/AIDS epidemic in Zambia. This lyrical film follows Mutinta Mweemba, a 28-year-old subsistence farmer living in a polygamous marriage. After learning she is HIV-positive and pregnant, Mutinta sets out to keep her unborn child virus-free and break the cycle of transmission.

IDA: How did you get started in documentary filmmaking?

Maggie Betts: I don't know that I ever really "got started" in documentary filmmaking; it's more just something I woke up one day and found myself doing. I'd spent a large part of my adult life traveling to various countries in Africa, and was always very interested in the plight of HIV and its impact upon the continent. As this interest grew, I also began to learn more about PMTCT (Prevention of Mother to Child Transmission)--particularly all these incredibly brave young women and mothers who were all fighting so anonymously and in total isolation to try and save their babies from their disease. It just struck me at some point what a valid and important topic this might be to explore in a documentary--how hopeful it was. I'm also a very artistic person who'd always dreamed of making a film. I suppose it all just kind of gelled in a weird way, and somehow I ended up making this documentary.

IDA: What inspired you to make The Carrier?

MB: In addition to wanting to support this extraordinary goal of soon seeing a new HIV-free generation in Africa; my initial inspiration for the film had a lot to do with motherhood, with just exploring this idea of maternal love and sacrifice, pushed to such an unthinkable extreme. And it was mostly just a very visceral and emotional type of pull towards something for me; it wasn't at all academic. I often thought, "What would I do if I was pregnant and there was a disease in my body that could somehow harm my baby? What would that be like and feel like and how could anybody possibly be strong enough to get through that?" Still, this was all very hazy and theoretical--until I finally met Mutinta, the lead protagonist in the story, as well as a very beautiful young mother who was actually living that experience. There was and is something so transcendent about her--the way she handled herself, carried herself and got herself through. So Mutinta soon became the film's most motivating and enduring inspiration for me.

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

MB: I think the greatest challenge in making the film had to do with the fact that it all takes place in a small community in rural Zambia. Just the experience of spending months at a time living and shooting in a country so far away, in a culture so radically different from our own. It was also very hot, and we had to endure an entire month of the rainy season--these torrential downpours that would come in out of nowhere and totally ruin our shoot for the day. So that wasn't always easy. Being constantly surrounded by people living and struggling with HIV/AIDS and having to look it so directly in the face every day was also frequently very sad and difficult for me emotionally. There was so much loss and death everywhere. Everybody in the community was in some way affected by AIDS, so sooner or later it really starts to affect you too. Still, I was so continuously moved by how resilient and heroic the people were. They were such fighters, so determined to overcome every obstacle. I think ultimately that also made whatever obstacles we as a crew were facing--all the little daily crises that come up in the course of a shoot--seem quite minimal and insignificant in context. 

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

MB: My vision for the film changed dramatically throughout every stage of the process. From pre-production through shooting through post, the story was so constantly in flux and constantly evolving, but in a way that's also the most fun part of documentaries. I think the most significant shift took place when we first arrived in Zambia, and were scouting and interviewing different women who might serve as the main protagonist of the film. When we first met Mutinta, she was with her husband and they gradually informed us that there were also two other wives in their family. Telling a story about an HIV-positive woman who'd become pregnant and was trying to save her baby was one thing. Adding the fact that she was also in a polygamous marriage and one of three wives was another thing entirely and at first very overwhelming and scary to me. I really had to reshape the entire narrative in my head, just to somehow make room for and accommodate this reality. But in the end I do think it made the story that much richer, so much more layered and complex.

IDA:  As you've screened The Carrier--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?

MB: We've screened the film a great deal, both at other festivals as well as in more intimate, "friends and family" type settings. And in general I've just been very touched by how strongly and emotionally people seem to react. It means so much, more than I can even express, to see how people really do connect with and feel for Mutinta and her experience, and often in such intense and personal ways of their own. I suppose the thing that's also surprised me, and through so many different people's reactions, is how indignantly they feel towards the husband, Abarcon. Among other things, the film focuses a lot on this evolving relationship between its two main subjects, Mutinta and Abarcon, who are husband and wife. Through the course of it you also learn about a lot of very challenging, sometimes unspeakable things that the husband has done to his wife. For myself, I think just from knowing him and spending so much time studying and editing him, I'd somehow come to see him as very complicated person, privately struggling with his own shortcomings and even his own cruelty, so maybe not necessarily "all bad." I thought others might see him that way too and possibly find something redeeming in him, but most audiences just haven't. So it hasn't really bothered as much as surprised me, how absolutely indignant people feel towards him.

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

MB: I like Frederick Wiseman a lot and Albert Maysles, whom I was even lucky enough to meet and talk with a bit during the course of making my film. What inspires me most about their work is just the astounding patience they bring to it all. It's their ability to just wait and observe and let "the moment" happen on its own, to not force or manipulate things too much. It's so much easier said than done and takes a tremendous amount of discipline--a tremendous amount of faith, really. But often the "moment found" is so much more surprising and beautiful than anything you could've ever dreamed or created. Both those directors are a great testament to that and I really admire their mastery.

The Carrier will be screening August 19 through 25 at the IFC Center in New York City and August 26 through September 1 at the Laemmle Sunset 5 in Los Angeles.

For the complete DocuWeeks^TM 2011 program, click here.

To purchase tickets for The Carrier in New York, click here.

To purchase tickets for The Carrier in Los Angeles, click here.

As reported in indieWire and Deadline, Jason Baldwin, Damien Echols and Jessie Misskelly, subjects of Joe Berlinger and Bruce Sinofksy's Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills (1996) and its 2000 follow-up, Paradise Lost 2: Revelations-were  released from an Arkansas prison today, after serving 18 years for the 1993 murders of three children. The Arkansas District Attorney made the announcement.  The three defendants registered an Alford plea--admitting guilt, while maintaining their innocence. Berlinger and Sinosky were readying Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory for its world premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival next month when they heard the news. The New York-based filmmakers  flew down to Jonesboro, Arkansas this morning to film what will be a new, happy ending--the hearing and subsequent liberation of the so-called West Memphis Three.

The three were convicted of murder, despite a lack of physical evidence and allegations of Jury misconduct. DNA evidence subsequently recovered at the crime scene failed to match that of the three defendants.

"Eighteen years and three films ago, we started this journey to document the terrible murders of three innocent boys and the subsequent circus that followed the arrests and convictions of Baldwin, Echols and Misskelly," Berlinger said in a statement. "To see our work culminate in the righting of this tragic miscarriage of justice is more than a filmmaker could ask for."

The final installment of the Paradise Lost trilogy will air in January on HBO, which aired the first two films.

As Berlinger explained to Deadline's Mike Fleming, it was the Internet in its nascent stages as a social media mechanism that helped the film attract the attention of such celebrities as Eddie Vedder, Johnny Depp and Natalie Maines.  And according to Deadline's  Nikki Finke, it was filmmaker Peter Jackson (The Lord of the  Rings Trilogy) and his producer/partner Fran Walsh who provided substantial financial and legal support over a seven-year period.

The truth--and documentaries--can indeed set you free.

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks^TM Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 12 through September 1 in New York City and August 19 through September 8 in 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 David Darg, director of Sun City Picture House.

Synopsis: After watching the last of the old movie theaters get destroyed in the Haiti earthquake, a young Haitian man rallies an entire community to build a cinema and make his dream come alive on a hill above a tent city.

IDA: How did you get started in documentary filmmaking?

David Darg: After college I started making short films for humanitarian organizations, documenting various projects around the world for donor feedback. It started with very basic project reporting, but as my understanding of humanitarian issues grew, so did my interest in the root cause of poverty and conflict. So my filmmaking began to take on a more investigative style, and I started working for an NGO that allowed me to do backpack-style journalism on the front lines of disasters. For the past seven years I have responded to natural disasters and wars all over the world. Sometimes I will stay in a country for just a few weeks or months, but on larger disasters I have lived in places longer. In 2008 I lived in China for a year after the Sichuan earthquake and documented a project to rebuild an entire village that was destroyed. In 2010 I arrived in Port Au Prince, Haiti, 48 hours after the earthquake, and I have lived there ever since.  In Haiti I was documenting emergency relief projects for the first several months, but I now work on longer format stories about the nation's recovery. Using Haiti as a launch pad, I was recently in Japan for a month documenting the aftermath and emergency response to the tsunami, and most recently I entered the sealed-off war zone of South Kordofan in Sudan to document the unfolding genocide happening there.

IDA: What inspired you to make Sun City Picture House?

DD: Producer Bryn Mooser and I started showing films to Haitian children in some of the large tent cities at night. We took a projector and sound system and threw up a white sheet, and the kids loved it. It gave them some escape from the horrors of the earthquake and their surroundings in the camps. At the same time, one of our Haitian colleagues named Raphael took us to see some of the collapsed movie theaters in Port Au Prince; after the earthquake, there were literally no movie theaters left. Raphael had a dream to build a movie theater again and we promised him we would help him build it. So the project started and we knew that we had to document it. But the main inspiration for us in making the film was to show the "real" side of Haiti that we see every day, a different story from the one shown in the news.  The news media only seems to paint a negative image of Haiti--that it is doomed to failure. In Sun City Picture House we thought it was important to address some of the issues that definitely make Haiti a difficult challenge, but it was important that the "Hope" of Haiti shines through. Every day we are inspired by the beauty of Haiti and the Haitian people; we see constant development, improvement, joy and hopefulness, and that is the message we wanted to convey in Sun City.  

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

DD: The whole project happened so quickly that we didn't have time to plan anything. Bryn and I were helping to build the movie theater and having to shoot simultaneously. It was still grueling working long hours in the day and dumping and reviewing footage at night. The edit was also tough because we had our full-time day jobs: Bryn was working on an education project and I was coordinating clean water projects.  We would get together and edit in the evenings--sometimes in Bryn's tent! On occasion we would work on a complicated edit and the power would go out and we'd lose a bunch of work. It was about as down and dirty as you could ever hope to get on a production. When you watch the film you realize that there is a huge dichotomy of emotion from the absolute darkness of the city morgue to the joy of the children in the theater. Transitioning between those themes in 27 minutes was quite a challenge, but the contrast is so worthwhile and important.   

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

DD: The entire project started when Bryn and I heard a Catholic priest, Father Rick, tell the story of a little red wagon. We wanted to turn that into a short film on its own. Then the movie theater project started, and we thought of how we could combine the two stories. When we started production we had a very sketchy outline of what we wanted to achieve. All we really knew was that a powerful story was unfolding and needed to be told. Then in post-production we started to see the power in the film as a whole and when we finally worked the twist in at the end, we knew that we had managed to take it full circle, from a story of misery to one of hope

IDA: As you've screened Sun City Picture House--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?

DD: We've had a fantastic reaction from audiences. It's definitely a feel-good film, and viewers seem to get really uplifted by the message. The most rewarding reactions have been from Haitians who have thanked us for the film's message. It's really wonderful to be ambassadors for Haiti in that respect. Many viewers ask us how they can get involved in supporting Haiti, so the film has definitely motivated people to take action. Sun City is a bit of a tear jerker, and I've seen grown men wiping away tears as the house lights come up. Even though I've seen it more times than I can remember, I still tear up a bit every once in a while at the end.  

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

DD: Asger Leth's Ghosts of Cîté Soleil is one of the most powerful feature docs I've ever seen, and it came out of Haiti. Filmmakers like that who put themselves in the most dangerous situations imaginable to tell the story are quite inspirational. I'm very inspired by the photographer James Nachtwey; when the War Photographer documentary came out, it had a big impact on my thinking.  

It's true that those of us on the frontlines of wars and disasters have a big responsibility to tell the story well, as we are witnesses to history unfolding. Often times those oppressed by war or disaster have little chance to have their voice heard, so that is where Bryn and I want to focus our efforts--to give them a voice through film. Our website is www.ryot.org, where we regularly post short films we make from around the world with the aim of spreading awareness and giving a voice to the voiceless.

Sun City Picture House will be screening August 19 through 26 at the Laemmle Sunset 5 in Los Angeles.

For the complete DocuWeeks^TM 2011 program, click here.

To purchase tickets for Sun City Picture House and the rest of the films in the DocuWeeks Los Angeles Shorts Program, click here.

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks^TM Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 12 through September 1 in New York City and August 19 through September 8 in 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 Katja Esson, director/producer/writer of Poetry of Resilience.

Synopsis: Poetry of Resilience is a documentary about six poets from around the world who survived some of the worst political atrocities of the 20th Century: Hiroshima, the Holocaust, China's Cultural Revolution, the Kurdish Genocide in Iraq, the Rwandan genocide and the Iranian Revolution. By summoning the creative voice of poetry to tell stories of survival and witness, each reclaims humanity and dignity in the wake of some of history's most dehumanizing circumstances. With grace and humor, the film explores language as an internal means of survival--for the poet and the readers of poems.

IDA: How did you get started in documentary filmmaking?

Katja Esson: My film education started in fiction. But when I moved to New York, I saw a million stories of real people all around me. My first short doc, Vertical Traveler, is about an "elevator man" and New York City's unique relationship with elevators. Shortly after, I made Ferry Tales, about sisterhood in the Staten Island Ferry bathroom. My two most recent documentaries, Latching On, about the politics of breastfeeding in America, and Skydancer, about Mohawk Indian ironworkers, also take place in New York. Having maintained the eye of an outsider, I have a different perspective on many things. When Ferry Tales was all over the media, some reporters asked, "Why did it take a German director to discover something that was under our noses?" The answer is that distance and strangeness bring their own kind of focus.

Poetry of Resilience is very different in that regard. It feels like a culmination of all the work I have done so far.

IDA: What inspired you to make Poetry of Resilience?

KE: In September 2006, I was invited to Massachusetts to document a conference of poets from around the world. I have to admit, my first thought was, "Oh boy, filming people reading poetry...How boring!" But as soon as these incredible poets--who are also survivors--stepped on stage and spoke not so much about the atrocities they endured but rather about the will to survive spiritually and artistically, I knew that this was a film I needed to make.

Making documentaries satisfies my deepest hunger for discovering who we are and what makes us human.

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

KE: Poetry and resilience are two powerful forces but very elusive. The poets' stories challenged me to find new ways of interweaving cinematic and written language, to find new forms of visual storytelling. While working on the film, I constantly battled two questions: What is the resilience of the human spirit? And can art (in this case poetry), as an expression of our common humanity, help transform lives?

The making of the film has taken me on a five-year journey of discovery on which I feel that I experienced the best and worst of humankind. The biggest challenge for me was to experience that my own belief in humanity was often shaken.

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

KE: The film was planned as a feature film, with the individual stories of survival and the historical and political backgrounds taking up a much larger part. But during editing,  a fact became so painfully clear for me: History repeats itself. The biggest horror is how "similar" all these atrocities really are. And how we keep saying "never again" and then there is always an "again." So the focus shifted. Evil has no name and no country. And the documentary short became the perfect frame for the film.

IDA: As you have screened Poetry of Resilience--whether on the festival circuit, or in screening rooms, or in living rooms--how have audiences reacted to the film? What was the most surprising or unexpected about their reactions?

KE: I know that I was tackling something that had not been done before; in fact, many people warned me about making this kind of film about poetry. We just finished the film and only screened it at private screenings, but the reactions have amazed me. People suddenly can't get enough of the poetry. Everybody has been able to find connections in the film--interestingly enough, very different ones; some might love what others absolute hate.

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

KE: I am inspired by other artwork, like music or in this case, by poems. But my biggest inspiration comes from people--people who then often end up in my films.

Poetry of Resilience will be screening August 19 through 26 at the Laemmle Sunset 5 in Los Angeles.

For the complete DocuWeeks^TM 2011 program, click here.

To purchase tickets for Poetry of Resilience and the rest of the films in the DocuWeeks Los Angeles Shorts Program, click here.

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks^TM Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 12 through September 1 in New York City and August 19 through September 8 in 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 Marina Goldovskaya, director/writer of A Bitter Taste of Freedom.

Synopsis: In her fearless quest to uncover the wrongdoings of Russian authorities, Anna Politkovskaya inspired awe in some and fear in others. An investigate journalist for Moscow's liberal Novaya Gazeta, she was often the only spokesperson for innocent victims. At age 48 she was assassinated for simply doing her job. Filmed over a period of 20 years, A Bitter Taste of Freedom tells an incredible story of a woman who consciously gave her life for her convictions.

IDA:  How did you get started in documentary filmmaking?

Marina Goldovskaya: I graduated from the Department of Cinematography of the Moscow State Film School, which was founded by Sergey Eisenstein. I started my professional career as a newsreel cinematographer at Central Television in Moscow in 1964. It was an exciting time for Soviet Television: In 1968 our TV News Unit had been transformed into a big Unit called "Ekran"("Screen"); it produced not only news programs, but also films--both documentaries and narratives. Within years, this studio grew into the biggest in the USSR. It gathered a wonderful team of  filmmakers who came from all the Soviet republics. Ekran also had the best and most modern equipment, mostly French and German, which allowed me to use the most advanced methods of filmmaking, such as the observational method, which was the Russian analogue of Direct Cinema and Cinema Vérité.

I started as an assistant cameraperson, but within five years I became one of the leading cinematographers working for the News programs and films in the Documentary Film Unit. I also was the first and the only woman to shoot, direct and write my own documentaries.

During my 25-year tenure at Central Television (1964-1989), I  made 150 TV programs and 25 documentaries as director/cinematographer. Many of my films received top awards at festivals.

Concurrent with my filmmaking career, I pursued a career as a scholar. I wrote and defended two dissertations and published five books on documentary and the art of cinematography.

Starting at the age of 25, I also started teaching documentary and cinematography--first in the Moscow Film School, then in the Department of Journalism at Moscow State University.

In 1989 I left Central Television to become an independent filmmaker working for different Russian and mostly foreign studios and units ( American, French, German and Austrian).

In 1991 after teaching documentary at University of California at San Diego, Vassar College and Cal State Northridge, I joined the faculty as a tenured professor at the Department of Film, Television and Digital Media at UCLA.

IDA: What inspired you to make A Bitter Taste of Freedom?

MG: In 1991 I made A Taste of Freedom, a documentary about the Politkovskaya family. This film was an attempt to show the changes happening in the Soviet Union via a Russian family. I chose as my protagonists the family of my former students, Sasha and Anna Politkovskaya. I felt that they were interesting people, very charismatic and very much involved in the events happening in our country. At the time, Sasha was a news reporter who traveled around the country, and was one of the best known TV journalists in the Soviet Union. His wife, Anna, was a housewife, raising their two children. Anna and I became friends while I was making this film. Our friendship continued after the film was finished.

After completing A Taste of Freedom, I felt I had to continue to film the changes happening in Russia. I felt that it was very important to document those changes and film people living their lives in the midst of these changes. The Politkovskaya family were some of the many people I followed over the years. Anna became one of my best friends and one of my most favorite characters. She was one of the most charismatic people I knew. And while I had been following her life with my camera, she was growing into one of the most prominent journalists and civil rights activists in Russia. So I captured not only the changes in Anna's personal life, but also the changes in Russia.

Her work was dangerous, and she knew she was risking her life. But her conscience didn't allow her to stop working.

When Anna was killed, I knew I had to make a film about her. I wanted people to know what kind of a person she was and what a great woman our country had lost. I knew I had the footage of Anna that nobody else had. Many journalists filmed her when she was alive, but nobody filmed her as a woman, mother and friend. I knew my footage was unique. And so I made the film A Bitter Taste of Freedom.

 It is a film about Anna, and it is a film about my country.

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

MG: There were many challenges. But challenges and obstacles in documentary follow the filmmaker from day one, and that's why it is such a joy to try to overcome them and try to fulfill the goals you set up, beginning from the very first stage of formulating the idea.

You set the goals, and then life starts to push you away from the first vision of the film. And usually on the way to reconciling the primary idea with the reality you face and film during the shooting  period, you try to keep the story straight, but allow life to stuff your primary idea with new events, details and of course, new ideas. The film grows, and you try not to force anything. Just allow it to grow, keep your eyes and heart open, and trust life. It is hard to explain, what you think, but it is an amazingly exciting and rewarding process. It is a truly creative process, when out of little things big things emerge, and the film starts to live its own life...

My main challenge was an enormous amount of material I had accumulated over the years. And many things that were very interesting did not belong in this film. It was a torture for me to get rid of this "unnecessary footage." My only consolation was that I hope that I'll still find a way to use this footage in another film I hope to make in the future.

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

MG: This was a unique film in my life: From the very beginning I knew what I wanted to make, and finally made exactly what I wanted to make. Of course I couldn't know from the beginning how the film will unfold; I couldn't foresee the film structure. The film, as it usually happens, was born in the editing process. But well before we began editing, I knew I would start the film from "the end," Anna's funeral, and then will tell the story of her life: her young years, her first exposure to the war, her growing involvement in human rights activism, etc. And parallel to her story I was pulling "the big story": the history of the rise and fall of democracy in Russia. My characters such as Michail Gorbachev, the architect of Russian perestroika; Karinna Moskalenko, the lawyer and family friend;, Ilya and Vera, Anna's kids; Raisa Mazepa, Anna's mother; and journalists Alla Bossart, Alexei Venediktov and Evgenia Albatz all gave me the opportunity to build this historical line, which was a very important element in this film.

IDA:  As you've screened A Bitter Taste of Freedom--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?

MG: I showed the film to only a couple of friends, and their input was enormous. They helped me to make the story more comprehensive and emotional. I am extremely grateful to them: to my producer Malcolm Dixelius, to Roland Joffee, Cara Mertes, Robert Rosen, Vivian Umino, and of course, my husband, George Herzfeld, who saw all my cuts and patiently and passionately  gave me his critical comments.

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

MG: I love Dziga Vertov and Chris Marker, and I am a great fan of Ricky Leacock, the Maysles Brothers, DA Pennebaker, Bob Drew, Fred Weisman, Errol Morris and Alan Berliner.

A Bitter Taste of Freedom will be screening August 19 through 25 at the IFC Center in New York City, and August 26 through September 1 at the Laemmle Sunset 5 in Los Angeles.

For the complete DocuWeeks^TM 2011 program, click here.

To purchase tickets for A Bitter Taste of Freedom in New York, click here.

To purchase tickets for A Bitter Taste of Freedom in Los Angeles, click here.

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks^TM Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 12 through September 1 in New York City and August 19 through September 8 in 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 Robert James, director/producer, with Ondi Timoner, of Library of Dust.

Synopsis: Thousands of corroded copper urns containing the cremated remains of unclaimed psychiatric patients were discovered in 2004. A tour of the Oregon State Hospital involving the local press and a state senator was conducted to uncover the deplorable conditions of the hospital. What they didn't expect to find was a storeroom full of human ashes dating back to the late 1800s. Photos are taken of the mysterious corrosive effect on the canisters, and several histories of these forgotten souls are revealed in this unique tale.

IDA: How did you get started in documentary filmmaking?

Robert James: I took a few film classes at City College in San Francisco as a mid-life career change after making travel videos and discovering IMovie on my Apple for editing. After two semesters I saw DIG!, Ondi Timoner's award-winning doc, and was so inspired by the edginess of it that I contacted her on Facebook. We eventually met, I traveled the world with her and assisted on her film at the time and then pitched the idea of Library of Dust to her while doing shots of Mezcal in Oaxaca, Mexico. She agreed, and we made it.

IDA: What inspired you to make Library of Dust?

RJ: I went to a gallery showing in San Francisco three years ago of six-foot photos by David Maisel of the canisters of ashes that had been discovered in the Oregon State Hospital. I was so intrigued by the story of these lost souls that I approached Maisel about making a film. He resisted at first, but once I started working with Ondi, he knew I was serious and agreed to help me piece the story together.

RJ: The Oregon State Hospital was constantly changing staff, and at one point a new PR staff member called me during our shoot and told me we couldn't shoot any of the hospital exteriors. At that moment we were shooting an interview using an exterior background; I just told her, "Okay." Also, getting the senator, who is pivotal in our film, was a challenge. We didn't know we were actually going to get his interview until about two hours before we did it. I had a daily heart attack leading up to his final consent.

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

RJ: Like all, or at least many, documentaries, the story takes different courses as you meet new people. In pre-production we thought Maisel's personal story of the canister discovery was very important. As we moved forward, his story became more and more diminished. During production we got involved with stories of current and past hospital staff and patients. As we got to post, we didn't end up using much of that footage. While shooting I was very interested in filming the crematorium. My co-director couldn't see the need; we ended up opening our film with that footage.

IDA:  As you've screened Library of Dust--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?

RJ: People seem moved by it, but more from the mysteries of our story than an emotional response. We were worried about our beginning, which showed an actual cremation, and how people would react. Everyone has loved it and we are so pleased, since we do too. I am most surprised when people shrug their shoulders and say "Eh...." and have no reaction.

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

RJ: My co-director, Ondi Timoner, changed my idea of what a doc could be by showing that docs can be thrilling. I also love Amy Berg. Deliver Us From Evil chilled me to the bone.

My current favorite directors are Seth Gordon, who made King of Kong: A Fist Full of Quarters, and Michael Stephensen, who made The Best Worst Movie. Both showed that any tiny subject, whether it be a video game competition or an homage to a bad film, can be entertaining if the right person tells the story--especially if the subject is one you couldn't care less about, but you end up caring about due to the filmmaking.

Library of Dust will be screening August 19 through 26 at the Laemmle Sunset 5 in Los Angeles.

For the complete DocuWeeks^TM 2011 program, click here.

To purchase tickets for Library of Dust and the rest of the films in the DocuWeeks Los Angeles Shorts Program, click here.

Jennifer Arnold (A Small Act) has officially signed on to join Michele Ohayon (S.O.S/State of Security, Colors Straight Up) and Lauren Greenfield (Thin) on the Women Behind the Camera panel as a part of Doc U on Monday, August 15 at 7pm. Moderated by producer Lucy Webb, these accomplished women filmmakers will discuss the rewards, challenges and opportunities women face in producing and directing documentary films.

This special engagement is one night only. The night's conversation will be followed by an audience Q&A and a reception on the Cinefamily's backyard Spanish patio.

Over the next month, we at IDA will be introducing our community to the filmmakers whose work is represented in the DocuWeeks^TM Theatrical Documentary Showcase, which runs from August 12 through September 1 in New York City and August 19 through September 8 in 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 Michèle Ohayon, director/producer/writer of S.O.S./State of Security.

Synopsis: January 2001. Nine months before the attacks of 9/11, Richard Clarke briefs Condoleezza Rice on a strategy to "deter, defeat, and respond vigorously to" al-Qaeda. Clarke's proposal is dismissed. He resigns before the Iraq War. In March 2004, Clarke memorably declares before the 9/11 Commission, "I failed you. Your government failed you." S.O.S. / State of Security unveils Clarke's dramatic 30-year career in the White House as counter-terrorism czar and head of cyber security. The film offers a rare look at the people behind national security--military generals, the CIA, hackers, veterans and ambassadors who are speaking out.

IDA: How did you get started in documentary filmmaking?

Michèle Ohayon: I went to Tel Aviv University to study film and television, and wanted to focus my first films on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I didn't feel that the times were right for a comedy.  Through a documentary, by spending intimate time with my subjects living under military occupation and in refugee camps, I could show my people that not everyone is a terrorist. That was my way of encouraging dialogue between the two people, and contributing to the effort of peace.

When I moved to LA, I still focused on the underdog.  I am not really interested in the rich and famous; they don't need me to have a voice. My first documentary in the USA was about hidden homeless women (It Was A Wonderful Life); my next documentaries focused on kids in South Central LA (Colors Straight Up), a couple in concentration camps (Steal a Pencil for Me), and the myth of the macho cowboy (Cowboy Del Amor).

IDA: What inspired you to make S.O.S./State of Security?

MO: I started the film during the George W. Bush Administration. I was disillusioned by America being the "promised land," as seen through the eyes of a foreigner, and quite appalled by the political apathy both in the White House and among us, the people. September 11 was an obvious wake-up call, but having grown up in Israel, I was used to security and terror as part of my life. When Richard Clarke published Against All Enemies and when he publicly stated, "Your government failed you," I was intrigued by his dramatic arc. He joined government to fulfill a dream and answer a call by President John F. Kennedy to contribute, and then throughout 30 years of service, he fought to be heard. His truth, followed by a resignation, was for me the story of a nation--from dream to disillusionment--and a story worth telling, one of a failed national security and a nation led down a false path.

However, I had a great challenge ahead of me: How do you tell this story in images? How do you visualize "National Security"--an abstract, intellectual concept? And Clarke, being a secretive figure, was not my typical subject, as he would not let me be "in his face" with a camera--not even as a fly on the wall.

However, when I met him in Washington, DC--a meeting arranged by his team, all former Capitol Hill guys--I was inspired by his clarity and accessible analysis of the status of the United States in the world of today. Whether I agreed with him or not, his willingness to speak out deserved recognition. Despite his resignation, he still believed that youth should serve and participate, something that I could relate to on a personal level. That was for me the link to my world, something I search for when I approach a new film. In some ways, I need to make it mine so I can feel it and let the audience experience what I do.

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

MO: The challenge is always funding. Part of the budget fell through in the midst of shooting, when the market crashed. Another challenge, as mentioned before, was how to visualize the big words "National Security." Also, the Department of Homeland Security was unfriendly, knowing that Clarke, a controversial figure, was involved in the project. He was always very vocal and critical of the national security failures, and spoke against the bloated Department of Homeland Security, created by Bush after 9/11, to show that his administration was doing something, as Clarke states. I couldn't get their reaction, I couldn't get current CIA or FBI members for obvious reasons, and I now had a film in the can but I had hit a dead end. I had to shut down production for nine months. I knocked on every door to find funding to help finish the film, in the worse economic climate at the time.

Many sleepless nights later, I found my angel: Sidney Kimmel. He had a passion for the subject, and agreed to give me finishing funds.

As for the images, my editor, Edgar Burcksen, with whom I had worked on Colors Straight Up, and my very talented DP, Theo Van De Sande, and I came up with a visual language and cutting pace that would tell history without lingering on it. I had to tell the past in order to explain the present. And how to work around the interviews and try to tell the story in as many images as possible? We ended up with 2,000 cuts!

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

MO: My vision took an inevitable turn when, in the midst of production, Obama was elected. The sharp criticism of Clarke was almost in the way of the euphoric atmosphere of the "Change" campaign, so I had to take the film on a different path--more about the solutions, rather than the failures. On the other hand, many of my subjects who had left government went back to serve under Obama, which was a good ending to their story!

IDA:  As you've screened S.O.S./State of Security--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?

MO: Berlin was astonishing because the audience expressed a fundamental desperation after the film. They asked me, "If the United States could fail on the national security front, what are we going to do? Who shall we look up to?" I had then understood how dependent the world was on us, and that we could never afford to let them down.

In Sarajevo the admiration for President Clinton, who had saved the day for them at the end of their civil war, was an unforgettable deed that is shown in the film, and it got their applause.

 At the Jerusalem Film Festival, the Israelis, who are very critical when security is concerned, were very moved and told me at the Q&A that it is in fact a mirror on the issues they are facing, and they asked if I would be willing to make the same film about Israeli national security. I declined with all my might. One is enough.

At the Museum of Modern Art in New York we had a screening, with Susan Rice, the US Ambassador to the UN, in attendance,  as well as the Israeli ambassador. I think that half of the audience was Secret Service from both countries, and it felt very safe. Rice's reaction, as well as that of the New York/Washington, DC crowd, was positive beyond my expectations. We also showed the film to foreign policy makers. I was accompanied by Wendy Chamberlin, the former Ambassador to Pakistan, an extraordinary woman whom I got to know throughout the film. Again and again, I was amazed how chapters in history, whether failures or victories, are made by individuals and are bound to bear fatal mistakes.

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

MO: The early Michael Apted films (7 Up), the early Barbara Kopple films. Films about overcoming obstacles as best we can, while keeping our integrity and humanism.

S.O.S./State of Security will be screening August 19 through 25 at the Laemmle Sunset 5 in Los Angeles, and August 26 through September 1 at the IFC Center in New York City.

For the complete DocuWeeks^TM 2011 program, click here.

To purchase tickets for S.O.S./State of Security in Los Angeles, click here.

To purchase tickets for S.O.S./State of Security in New York, click here.