My Documentary Interview
Medium: Facets Film School
Interviewee: Film Program Director Charles Coleman
Interview Date: February 5, 2010

Dixon Christie interviews Film Program Director Chaadrles Coleman about his film academy, Facets Film School in Chicago and converses on the theology of films of yesterday and today.

Check out Facets Film School’s website at: http://www.facets.org/

MyDocumentary.ca: Charles Coleman.
Charles Coleman: Charles.

MyDocumentary.ca: Oh, hi Charles it’s Dixon here.
Charles Coleman: Hi, how are you?

MyDocumentary.ca: I’m good. Are you ready for your interview?
Charles Coleman: Sure!

MyDocumentary.ca: Ok. So, could you just start by giving us a little introduction? And tell us a little about your background?
Charles Coleman: My name is Charles Coleman. I’m the Film Program Director of Facets Cinematheque; which is an independent exhibition venue located in Chicago, dedicated to filming independent films; the true science as well as the importance of cinema as a means of artistic expression which is also demonstrated by professors and programs as well as retrospectives. And I’ve been in, and also teach classes at the University of Chicago. I give lectures around the city including one last night at Columbia College and I also do talks; a program known as Talk Cinema and I’ve been doing this for over 10 years. I used to do a similar thing at the University of Chicago, where I primarily studied mathematics.  I got into film primarily because it was a way for me to find out more about the world, from a cultural stand point. Since film is a pretty reliable barometer on what is going on regarding literature, culture, and politics. It certainly is a more reliable indicator than what you generally hear in the media.  Another thing about film that is of interest to me is how it reflects the way people feel about themselves. When in particular countries I  also like to detect certain trends, that I think broadcast what is really happening on a certain spectrum; like there’s a new dynamic happening in Romania, Argentina, Austria for example, and as well as France. There’s a political scope, to showing films as an exhibitor, and I have a particular criteria which is pretty dedicated to making sure that I show a broad, a means of which something should be seen in Chicago, the commercial potential and at the same time, I want to make sure there’s a discourse and a healthy perspective about these films, trying to stay away from any obstructionist agendas like biases or personal interest because I think there’s a certain admirable democracy about film in general but, it relives considerable embedded pressures that don’t need to be there when one is attempting to clarify matters, for which will ultimately be a much better world.

MyDocumentary.ca: For example in the music and transition series, you’ve chosen Popeye, you know along side of Saturday Night Fever and all that jazz, one could argue that Popeye could be the worst of the lot, and the most non commercial, you know compared to those movies, you generally wouldn’t see it in there, so is that kind of a representation of , your attempt to shoot movies that are,  you feel are beneficial for, people to see for a particular reason over you know zany commercial appeal it might have had?
Charles Coleman: Well, regarding that class...there's a lot of musicals came out recently, Chicago, 9, Romeo and Juliet, and I think people need to get away from the idea that history is made for historians. There are a lot of films that have come out, where the musical has been revived. Most people know about the standard musicals like: Meet Me in St. Louis for example, but there’s been some success with these films, and there have been a lot of films, regardless of musicals that have been unfairly neglected, or stigmatized with adversarial dogma. I think it prevents people from seeing the film that was actually made as opposed to what’s being perceived. Now the case of Popeye; Robert Altman, the late Robert Altman, is a film maker who has done a lot of films that were very hard to categorize, most people e know about MASH, but he did: film noirs, he did satirical films, and he was a massive, or should I say he was an artist who dived into the deep end of the risk pool and there’s a whole thing with pop art most people know about, Roy Lichtenstein using a comic book as his format or Andy Warhol. Some people know about Chuck Jones animation, and they may know about the classic stuff at Warner Brothers. So he used the whole thing with Popeye, as a means to, from a satirical standpoint, to look at giving relationships getting large within the pop-art context. That’s one of the films that I think have been in the spirit because there’s a lot of genres that become disreputable, as people don’t really know enough about them to have, an informed opinion that is actually an underscore to anything truly meaningful. That why you have the recent rise of the graphic novel, for example. Most people know about Art Spiegelman, Maus for example got the Pulitzer Prize. And then the committee decided that that was a format that they no longer wanted to have. The means by which they gave these awards describes to a graphic novel which would no longer be the case, but this looks like The Watchman, Sin City for example, that was a big hit, though all those were ahead of the curve regarding his live action film. And even Rin Tin Tin for example is a serious film maker and animated cartoon in France, for example. I think in the case of all men, he was looking to sort of, comic strip more men and basically, play with a narrative, and look at the relationship between Popeye, Olive Oil and Bluto for example. Wimpy, Pappy all these other characters, it almost turned to like and adventure film. We do adventure films like that with Johnny Depp; people can now take it to a respectable level. But that is because the film has become validated by becoming commercially successful.  Now the film is not necessarily, artistically, barest of any validity because it didn’t do well in the box office. Look at what happened to Avatar; if Avatar hadn’t made any money, people wouldn’t be taking it seriously. It could still be the same film, so that just means that you know people are attaching, you know physical triggers to something and in terms of its quality, has nothing to do with the actual movie. As a matter of fact I think the merits of Popeye can be probably debated, it’s like one of those thing people review in the budget, and yeah there’s a film called Punch Drunk Love with Adam Sandler...

MyDocumentary.ca: Did you like that?
Charles Coleman: Well, it was a masterpiece. I mean it’s a true American romantic comedy drama, and people looking at some of these, I mean, you see a film like, I haven’t seen  the one called.. It was the biggest box office... The Hangover. You know that made a lot of money so people were like giving it undue celebration, I’m not saying the film can’t be on a broad level, they are interesting, but Paul Thomas Anderson is a really interesting film maker and just because Adam Sandler is in this film, but also is Emily Watson, Seymour Hoffman, Luis Guzman, and you now it’s a fantastic film. This is a film maker worth knowing, so you know basically people need to prove the process for which they make flippant decisions, and celebrate aspects of cinema allowing film makers to take chances. I mean, look at the whole thing with Popeye, Jules Fifer who used to be a world syndicated cartoonist, is the one that kind of brought back interest in Popeye which is what drove Robert Altman to want to do the project. I think Popeye suffers serious revision that’s why that film is in the class. The movies that are in particular who would choose for themselves to see, because there’s no gain in enforcing things that are already intimately familiar. It’s like playing a chess game, you are better off losing to a better player and learning from your mistakes as opposed to beating someone who score is lower than yours.

MyDocumentary.ca: Do you think that the overall quality of movies has improved? Is improving/ or do you think Hollywood is making better movies?
Charles Coleman: Oh actually I think we are making better movies than ever. I think we are dealing with a bonanza of really great films. The problem is most of these films are being detect as flawed. I mean, it just...I’ll give you an example: it’s the very fact that, a weekend determines a movies fate, is actually an issue that should no longer be in charge. But it is the easiest thing to talk about. So let’s resolve that, and a lot of times they don’t get to gain that traction. The film, The Hurt Locker, I mean saw the film 2 years ago, in Toronto and Kathryn Bigelow is an outstanding film maker, as is actually fortunate that she continues to be a working film maker who does not seem to work enough , but she is still making films, and the film took a year for it to get picked up another year for it to get released, now I’m glad people are seeing it, it still didn’t make that much money, so that film has been out there the entire time, a lot of film makers like Claire Denis from France, there’s Lucrecia Martel from Argentina. There’s a lot of, there’s Michael Haneke from Austria who's film “The White Ribbon” got Palme d’Or at Cannes this year, but just became this attitude, the effect; you know, people want to go to work and have the same things to talk about on Monday, as opposed to making their own choices, and seeing films that have been out there the whole time.  And back in the 60’s and early 70s it was common to talk about top film makers, Godard, Trudeau, Truffaut, Antonioni and there’s major actors like jack Nicholson was in Antonio’s, The Passenger, Lucci, like the last name, Paris, that was actually a pretty common thing, and but now a days, people look at film as a product, and they look for the biggest movies like the elephant films. They want to sort of see the big projects like Sandra Bullock in Blindside for example, and then they are able to give this film value and cruise the monetary deal. And then its gets trashed because of our 24/7 media process. It’s talked about nonstop and all of a sudden it becomes part of this thing called “society of the spectacle”. The thing below the parade, we are surrounded by all these different movies; it’s just that the film that will have that capability are below the radar, there are out there in the wilderness, you know people aren’t using their Lois and Clark diligence and finding these things, even people who want to see independent movies is the same model but a different order of magnitude. They will sees a film like Juno for example, it’s actually a good film, but that becomes its own phenomenon or a turnover of activity once again box office and awards, makes people think this is a good movie to see because any group of movies that are just as good or better. But they require you to be like a defence attorney to make it worth the time to get people to go and see it. And you know people want to see movies with happy endings, which wasn’t always the case. There used to be films with presence, The Man Who Shot Chinatown, that was a Hollywood film, they had happy endings, now they have movies that you need to play on multiple scenes. Big box office takes a weekend report that comes out on Sunday to make you realize how good that movie really is, sometimes the movie is just a means to sell other product, where the hype is the movie, so you sell insularly toys and soundtracks, that type of thing and evidently, when an actor does something remarkable like George Clooney tends to do occasionally, particularly with this Wes Anderson film, Fantastic Mr. Fox. Where you have Spike Jones doing Where the Wild Things Are, where are those people? You know you have filmmaker  Hayao Miyazaki has these fantastic films like Princess Mononoke for example, he’s one of the top animators in the world, but people are looking for Up or for Cars, anything from Pixar, so the truth is out there as they say in the X-Files, but you know it’s just unfortunate that the marketplace doesn’t allow these films to breathe in the atmosphere so everybody gets the same you know, apparatus,  might get independent films into scuba gear, other big movies are above the surface, and the audience is, you know they are not, uh, they are not looking for these things sometimes they might wait for it to show up on Netflix or it might be an excavation project, you know where they wait for someone to mention it to them or they missed it when it came out originally. And same thing with books, I  mean people looking for the next John Grisham for example, or Dan Brown it’s not their fault that when a bunch of books come out, they wait for someone like Oprah or some you know, tribal leader or some messianic forces to dictate to them what they should see. There are more films made than ever, think on an international scale all over the place it’s just a congested environment and producers or distributors they are weary because why would they make an investment and not get a return on that investment. So we don’t have too many venture philanthropists that are willing to promote something, because it s deserves to be promoted. There is some of them that are like that but they are going to be loss leaders, where you lose money for a good reason, most those people aren’t in business for profit like I read in this article today about time warner that spun off and you now a hybrid of AOL and cut them loose, and one they are going to play big movie production, and making money off of very commercial films, and essentially a lot of these movies are building the success of, the duplicators , I mean they are just rubber stamping the same movie, till they exhaust the genre. That why they have all these vampire movies mean vampire movies have been around for, decades I mean where you can see Carl Dreyer’s Vampyr back in early 20’s. For example you’ve got Bram Stoker’s Dracula, but because of the Twilight thing you’ve just got to exploit that aspect of it and eventually you’ve got werewolves, you got the next thing and you’ve got all these romantic comedies, and if a comedy had good money involved in it, it’s not that big if there is no big star in it, so they actually plan on making money on DVD. So, but there s a whole range of things out there that people need to see, like right now there’s a movie with, Kristen bell that just came out, recently, I mean in think it came out last weekend, so you know, that’s what people are looking for, there’s something like Forgetting Sarah Marshall that actually is a really good romantic comedy that surprised pleasantly and it did very well, so, there is still hope for a lot of these things. The one I was thinking about is called When In Rome, and I’ve heard nothing but mostly flattering things about that so, that’s the kind of thing you enjoy getting made, all you’ve got to do is site in the movie, you say Kristen Bell and Josh Duhamel, you know When In Rome. Next thing you know there will be one in Istanbul, one in Piccolo Faso, one in Austin Texas, it doesn’t matter. I mean, most of them are parents I mean this movie came in on Valentine’s Day, that’s just an omnibus of smorgasbord thrown on a bunch of appointed celebrities, hoping people will find a celebrity they like and will see the movie on that basis; it doesn’t really have to be a good film.

MyDocumentray.ca: Alright, I’ve got a couple more for you...they just released In the Realm of Senses, on Blu-ray. Criterion is releasing like a quite a few old and beautiful movies from the 60’s and 70’s on Blu-ray.  Are you excited about buying DVDs again? Are you buying... are you excited about seeing the movies in the original version rather than 10^th generation VHS copies?
Charles Coleman: The thing about Criterion, and other affiliated companies like that, with that type of prime directive, despite using Jurassic, what’s known as Jurassic technology, that is to show films on 9mm. I actually applauded this discovery of films because it does mean that people will no longer walk into darkness. There is a light in the projections booth so people will see these films.  They will talk about, like In The Realm of The Senses for example, I think it came out in 1976, it’s an I think it’s an Oshima film, and one of the first sexually explicit treatments but, it’s a true story that happened in 1930 Japan. And it’s called about its un-simulated sexual activity, but thing about that movie is it’s been remade a number of times in Japan. Oshima is a fantastic, transgressive film maker, his career is complete with films like we talk about, and you know the arrest, the holding about questioning the nature due to our perceptions of the Japanese character. He always looks at these satirical books and Japanese attitudes, he also is extremely sceptical about the marriage ceremony and how people react to each other. Sexual passions are all about power and leverage has also big with the he embraces the pornographic imagination. And what he’s doing with that is he is looking at how people relate to each other and even sex can be related to politics. In the case of In The Realm Of The Senses vs. the role playing behind the woman, has got to be the dominant figure. Which is... she is really on top. I mean, the guy she was having the affair with was her former master. But he becomes so sexually enthralled with her, that he becomes submission because of the extent and the degree of his passion for her. So she never goes out to work, which in her case is making more arrangements with other partners, like he stays in this, doge apartment, and he’s just there to service her.

MyDocumentary.ca: He lost like 20lbs in the making of that movie.
Charles Coleman: The thing about the film is Japanese history indicates that Japanese mentality is homogenous most people from Japan are mostly Japanese, so there’s a group think out there from their activities, and there is a key scene in that film, where he is in some kind of euphoric state walking in one direction and the other direction is a group of men about to invade. Now he`s already renounced his status, as a feudal lord as he is walking as an individual against a group and he’s allowing a woman to dominate him, that’s what Oshima's actually saying. He just uses these unorthodox techniques and also was an experimental film maker and he also wanted to agitate the process. People react to certain means and topics and how well made something might be because its outrage meter is just based on a rather, unreliable means by which they are protesting the status quo. You almost have to do something kind of shocking, to get them to see what you are really doing. And that’s what he was trying to do with the realm of the senses and that I think he was actually arrested in Japan for the printed script of the screenplay as opposed to the film itself, the film itself became notorious for issues of import and obscene publications act and all these issues but, you know people will make the same objections about violence, can also be pornographic. There’s tabloid porn, there’s celebrity reality porn, there’s all these other means of pornography regarding what we are inundated with, and they choose, they make these choices, objecting to something but they are surrounded by other things which are just s objectionable. There’s language porn regarding certain words that people don’t no longer think are tolerable, so you know a film maker like Oshima, you know I think this whole thing with Criterion for example open people can widen their aperture about what to see and make really great choices, and the same thing with the Asian material. I prefer people to actually see the movie on their own and then listen to the commentary, you know and the extras later. But you know after they’ve made their own decisions, but, at least that material is there. They can place something in context; they are not apt to being introduced into making snap judgements on something. So out of that whole thing if anything is or life being preserved actually you need the visual elements, burn our DVD so that will floss because a lot of films have actually regretfully been destroyed because of inventory issues, store films and find a controlled environment, and the storage and there’s fees involved and a lot of theatres don’t show that format anymore, and there is a lot of visual literacy regarding showing things in their best format. I enjoy reading books on electronic media, having something tangible as opposed to having a binder on it to transmit something to a little, to an iPod as opposed to going to a library or a book store, or actually buying the whole book, so now I think that’s fantastic . I think this whole thing with Netflix and Criterion and a bunch of other companies are doing this. Even going straight to DVD is better than not being seen at all. So I think people kind of mention their outrage, proportional to what they actually are about to protest, I think that is great.

MyDocumentary.ca: I have talked about 100 movies and I could honestly learn a lot from talking to you but I think we can wrap it up; you’ve been very generous with your time. Thank you.
Charles Coleman: You’re welcome.

MyDocumentary.ca: Where can people learn more about the classes and check out the school information?
Charles Coleman: You go to the Facets website which is, www.facets.org. Now on the left hand side there is a banner menu, that says study cinema click on that and there they are. If you click on view screenings you actually see what I’ actually currently playing in actual Cinematheque. We also have DVD programs on  all the other things so check the left hand side of www.facets.org and the menu is pretty clear about which one you can click on for whatever information you are trying to retrieve.

MyDocumentary.ca: Alright great, thank you very much.

My Documentary Interview
Film: Future of Food
Interviewee: Director Deborah Koons Garcia
Interview Date: January 14, 2010

Dixon Christie interviews director Deborah Koons Garcia about her film, The Future of Food, and her upcoming production, Soil.

Check out The Future of Food website at http://www.thefutureoffood.com/.

MyDocumentary.ca:Wonderful, OK. So, let's just start by bringing people up to date. A lot of people know you as a... like, one of the founders of this new food movement, your anti GMO, grass-root organizations, so tell us about some if this stuff you were doing before you made this ground breaking movie, Future of Food?
Deborah Garcia:Well, I started making films when I was in college. Like, geez, 40 years ago. And I just really liked it. I went to school in Chapel Hill North Carolina, and I just really enjoyed it. I made mainly, I made fiction films. I didn't do documentaries. You know, and
then I worked for people and made my own little films, and then I went to the San Francisco Art Institute in the, you know around 1980 and got an MSA and was continuing to make you know, fiction films, and then I made some educational films. There was one especially called, All About Babies, that was about the first 2 years of life, a 5 part series, narrated by Jane Alexander, which was really great and won a CINE Golden Eagle and some other awards. And then, and then I made a feature documentary in the early 90's and then my husband passed away, so I had a lot of stuff I had to do for his estate so I didn't make cinema film for a few years. When I came back to making films, i just wanted to do something really serious. And I wanted to do, I figured I wanted to do a documentary. I didn't want to do a film that was you know, be about me or whatever. I just wanted a very challenging serious topic and so I've been interested in food since college and I became a vegetarian in 1970 and all that so I was excited about food. And then when I started working on it, I discovered, you know, genetic engineering and patenting seeds and Monsanto and Monsanto buying up all the seeds and buying all this stuff and I was just so outraged. Because I didn't know about it and I was living in Marin County
eating, not that I was so conscious about all that stuff and I had no idea what was going on. This is about, you know, around 2000 and I figured I had to make a film about it. So, I started shooting right before 9/11 and we, I worked on it for about, it was very well received, it played a lot of festivals. Film Forum decided to run it, we had a great run in New York, 2 weeks, I think at least 2 weeks there and another 3 weeks at IFC and  a theatrical run of 30, over 30 cities and some film festivals and food festivals and farming
festivals and grass roots screenings and you know really fun. And I get a lot of support for it, because it's important and you know, I went myself. One of the things I sort of, I feel like I pioneered was, which was really fun was, people would call me up and say we really
want you to come to Spokane or to Iowa or to you know wherever, you know Pasadena or Maine and I would say, "Well, you know, I'll come. I'll come but I'll come, I'll show the film and then I'll be on the panel. I'm not going to do anything else. You have to do everything
else, including arrange for the publicity and if you want me to do interviews, whatever. What ever you want me to do, I'll do, but you have to set it up. I'm not going to set it up. And what I guess what they do, and I what they DID do is they would contact local people,
like local farmers, or winemakers or beer makers or cheese or professors or scientists or...Oh! First they would get food people and food people would come like an hour and a half before the screening and set up tables and set up their food. And people would come early and they'd sample the food and eat and chat and have fun and then we
would have the screening and then we'd have a panel with me and 2 or 3 people locally. These would be the scientist or the farmers or the whatever and then some people would even have a party after that the max you can do. You know, you can have the sampling the food before, and then the panel, and then a party if you want to do all that, and
people DID all that [laughs]. And what was so great about that was, almost none of those people had ever done anything like that before. And, you know, we suggested to them, things that they needed to do you know like make sure you get announcements in local magazines, make sure you know you make the deadlines, we gave them some tips you know, call up the radio about what to do and they did it. Because it was the first time they were doing it,  you know they out a lot of energy into it and they you know, would form committees and form contact people and reach out. And it really helped create some communities and some momentum around the food issues and so the film became like a vehicle for people to really create action in their communities. I was really happy about that because I think you know one of the fun things that documentaries can do is people, well any film but especially documentaries that are focused on a certain issue; it allows people a starting point you know. It's a common experience that people have when they see a film and I think relating it to the building of community and coming together, not just seeing it on your TV, which is great, but also having it be an event that people can come to and link up with other people I think you know, I think it is great thing people can do now.

MyDocumentary.ca:So, now that we understand your inspiration, tell us about the methodology that you have employed to tell your story?
Deborah Garcia:Well, first thing I did was, before I even started filming, I contacted various people that I knew that were really interested in food stuff; a woman, a friend of mine, she's a journalist who had a radio, a local radio show about food for years and you know we contacted people, I contacted many people I respected and said, you know "Who do you think I should talk to?" And they gave me a list and I researched those people and started talking to them and when I kinda figured out the direction I was going to go. And then the first thing we shot was Percy Schmeizer up in Canada and that was
the first thing we shot, and that was great. We shot that right before 9/11 and then we came back and then there was 9/11 you know? So the whole world changed. And then I just, you know part of how I conceived the film, because its such a complex topic, is just looking at the food system, the genetic engineering and how do you make sense of it?
First I thought of it like a crystal, you know? And I was thinking, I have different sides of the crystal, but then i kinda ran out of that analogy. It kinda felt like that wasn't helping me figure out how to write it and you know, and how to just tell it and what I did was just
simply start, OK what's important? Percy. OK, what do we need to know before we meet Percy so that we can understand what he went through? Of course we didn't understand patenting, you know? So then became, then it would be, what is the next thing? What is the next question I would ask myself? and then You know, the next question would be like,
"How can they get away with that?" you know, and it would be like you go, "OK yeah these people have infiltrated the government, that's how they get away with it. So, that was helpful in terms of creating the film. Was, 'what would be the next question that somebody would ask, that they would want the answer to? And you know, my editor Vivian Hillgrove is just one of the best editors in the country or in the world, especially documentaries and we've worked together before on a previous film and she understood my, you know we were on the same wavelength about esthetics and also being very conscience about the audience. You know, in that film is primarily an emotional experience? So if you load people up with to much information they're going to
turn off, so they're not going to take in what you want them to take in. So you have to really judge that and as far as making the film, 'cause I've done this really complex documentary on babies which is sort of similar; that one is a 5 part series but its similar because
you have a lot of complex details and you want to distill them down into a film that people like, and that they can make sense and they can follow. So, they can make sense of, so, I knew I could do that, you know what I mean? I knew I had the ability to do that and I knew
it takes a lot of time and so, the interesting thing you know, is when you have these kinds of documentaries that are trying to relay information is you know, when does the, when does your talent, the person your interviewing, when does an interviewee say what you want them to say? And when does the narrator say what you want them to say? And when does it not need to be said,  you just show it, you know? So that became even more interesting, because its always more powerful to show it then just to have somebody there yaking about it. So, that was also a really interesting challenge to figure out, you know and of course when your making a film you have a point that you want you make
but the footage that you have covering it is really short [laughs].

MyDocumentary.ca:Yeah.
Deborah Garcia:The sentence is long but the shot is short or you know, that whole thing of how you balance the visual with the sound. You know and how you, do you use just, this whole thing with pacing because I think a lot of young people now because of all the
technology they tend to want to have a lot of shots and cut stuff pretty fast and I'm you know more of a classical film maker so I tend to think that, you know I just don't believe in cutting things and squeeze in art, I think you have to give the audience a break and just
let the film breathe you know.

MyDocumentary.ca:If you look at Ken Burns movies, sometimes he can
spend 15 seconds up to a whole minute just looking at a single photo.
Deborah Garcia:Yeah. You know, I like that. I like that. I don't like the spacistic thing where the film maker is forcing, you know forcing stuff on me, you know like here's the next shot, here's the next shot. I like, I like to be able to reach out into the film. I don't like it
to force me, i don't like to feel too manipulated you know. I think that's like, you know, I don't mean I like boring long films, but I think you know, I, when I started making films, I sort of think of myself and also my editor who's also like my age, shes no spring
chicken, we're more classical film makers. Then as far as cuts go, there has to be some motivation in the cut, you know. There has to be some re,you know some connection between this shot and the next shot, whether its and idea, you know or whether its in one part of the frame. And then your consciously moving our eye to the next and then
there's the same part of the frame in the next shot. There's got to be some underlying sense to it. You can't just throw stuff up there cause you've been able to do that on your mac you know? And I think you know, there's a real difference between something that you put up on YouTube that you make and you know, sure people can make great films
that way but I think especially young film makers really need to take into account the audience. You know and when my editor was working on this film with soil and its our third major film we had done together, its this idea that when you watch the film, if you have test screenings you know,  work in progress screenings or test screenings
with various people, sit in the audience and be very conscious of when do they start fishing? You know? When do they start, when do you lose them? If you make a great film, you don't want to lose them. you want to keep them. Not that you wan to keep them on the edge of there seat for 90 minutes but you want them to be engaged and I think that that's
very important to, I mean if your really going to be a fine film maker and not just an informationalist who just puts stuff together and uses it in a certain way. I mean if you really want it to be a work of art, you want it to transform people and transform the way they see the world. You really have to honour the fact that you have a relationship
with the audience and that they are giving it their attention and that the images that you are putting up in front of them is going into their mind. You know those are going into their brain they're going to stay there forever. You have a responsibility and I think that um,
that something that sometimes with all this technology, it gets and can get lost in the enthusiasm to use the technology. Like one thing that is a funny little pet peeve of mine is these, you know these films now with The Hurt Locker, which I haven't seen and I really
respect Kathryn Bigelow as a film maker she is an excellent film maker. you know, but there is this style now that have like the camera be moving like nervous camera, jiggle camera you know what I mean?

MyDocumentary.ca:Yeah, point of view.
Deborah Garcia:Yeah, the point of view whatever its supposed to be a steady cam, like not even steady cam, like shaky cam. And the thing about what bugs me about that is that you know they reason why we accept film cuts is that we blink, you know?

MyDocumentary.ca:Yeah.
Deborah Garcia:The edits. Humans don't really see things the way that POV films, I mean every once in awhile you can have a shot like that because it can be effective but if the whole film is like that because its a style its really inaccurate because Humans don't see that way.

MyDocumentary.ca:Someone, an editor that I was working with actually said to me that um, film making should be an emersive experience where the viewer doesn't really experience or feel the changes in the shots. They completely forget the camera is there. And they develop a relationship with the subject matter much more naturally that way.
Deborah Garcia:I absolutely agree with that. I think that's one of the things we are lacking and the other thing is that humans don't, you know, human vision isn't shaky like that because you know we have stabilular systems that hold us steady. We don't see like that, so what we think when we see these shaky cameras is that the you, I call it the you are there camera, what they think is you are there. The fact is humans don't see that way. That's the supremacy of the machine over the human view. Your giving, that's the way machines see things, they don't have stabilular systems and that's the thing that really annoys me and people think they see this shaky camera work and they think Oh my God this is just like i was there because they are trained to think that. But in fact your not there because your right, you and your editor are right. Whats intriguing, you wouldn't be shaking around. You would be totally lost in that experience, you would be you know kind of jiggling her and then stopping there and doing something. You wouldn't be doing that at all. So I, that's what I think. I think that you want to be emerced in the experience and emerced in this, in whats there. And I don't think technique unless there's a good reason for it, I don't think technique should call to much attention to it. So, there needs to be craft but I think if your announcing your craft over and over and over again, its not craft, you know. your sort of a, its kind of a power trip for the audience.

MyDocumentary.ca:And then if we go back to ken Burns, the humility of and having such patience, can leave such incredible breathing room in between his shots and its really a humble approach to crafting something isn't it?
Deborah Garcia:Yeah, and also it allows people to, it allows that fullness of experience instead of chopping it up into little pieces. It allows it you know, it allows it to grow and allows your mind to sort of digest. I totally agree with that. I think, you know I think he's, he really has done so much amazing work you know it would have been so much more fun to study the civil war when I was in school watching his films than reading text books. He's done such a service for really letting people, you know, learn about history. I mean, hes
just its just really quite remarkable, his body of work.

MyDocumentary.ca:How do you think your movie has changed the ay that
people think about food?
Deborah Garcia:Well you know its been incredibly popular and allover the world, and people, we still get emails from people all the time because its playing on Hulu you know? It's really available now. For better or for worse but, you know, not, it's kinda hard to monitorize stuff if you, if everybody's, the people that, the changes that, you know we've got emails from people always from when it started and its been very popular and you knwo people bought 50 copies and send them out to all their friends and some buy 200 copies and send them to their legislatures or, it changes how people eat, how people see food, and it changes how people have started farmers markets because they
saw the film. I've gotten a lot of people telling me that. People have  changed jobs because they saw that film, they could be working for some chemical farm thing and they see the film and then they decide they don't want to do it anymore. And one guy changed the kind of law he practised because he saw the film and its been very influential I
guess you know its pretty incredible what its done 'cause I think it was like the first food film to really do that and because its kind of an emotional, we have an emotional connection to food. But, I think because we did such a good job, you know I can say that because its collaborative, I'm not bragging about myself. But we really brought it home to people and you know its,and you know people, and also once you see that film and you understand whats genetic engineering is, understand what Monsanto was trying to do, you rise that its outrageous and that's the word that people use when they email. I mean
even now we get people emailing everyday, people seen the film from all over the world and they go, "This is outrageous!" you know? And you know, I think if they DO contact their legislators and its you know the whole food thing its helped this grass roots, grass roots movement incredibly. Still even now with Obama in administration is that, well I'll give you an example; a friend of mine's uncle went to Harvard Law School with Ralph Nader. And they sat next to each other and you know this was years ago, like 55 years ago they sat next to each other because their names you know their names were you know M and N. She sent her uncle a copy of the Future of Food and then Ralph Nader saw it and called up Andrew Kimbell, who's in the film and then they went and had a meeting with Vilsack, you know the secretary of defence and agriculture because someone sent him The Future of Food and he watched it. And they were talking about you know, Monsanto and monopolies and taking all the seeds, and so here you go, right there. And I think that's, that's just one thing of many. I wanted it to be a tool of activism. I wanted people to send it around and show it and take action. Its been real heartening you know?

MyDocumentary.ca:So, a lot has changed in the last 6 years since you released the movie, namely the success of directors like Michael Moore. Why do yo think Michael Moore has been able to, in movies like that, been able  to, we used the word monotize earlier but lets just say, been able to be so unbelievably successful in such a short amount of time? When this movie about food seems to be so much more important than some of his topics, not that he doesn't make great movies.
Deborah Garcia:Well, I think that he's got  a name for himself and hes controversial in his films and you know, I mean there is also this thing that is, not so much anymore but its, you know when we, when The Future of Food came out and we turned it in to like a, you know to the academy, for like the Oscar thing, when we filled out the form it said um, I don't know the words it used, but basically it said we don't want educational films. And they did choose it as one of the, the did screen it at the, the screening committee did screen it, it was one of the, it didn't make the cut but it was one, and they did choose it to
play in this series at UCLA that the documentary screening committee chose as the Documentary of the Year and the Academy has it in its collection and all that. But, you know, they didn't want an educational film so a year or two later, it can be a truth 1 which is a totally educational film so you know there was this cliche and there's a little bit of it still happening now that you know, the films that people will approve of in terms of documentaries are documentaries where the film maker is in the film. Now when you think of Super Size Me, and you think of Michael Moore and even Born into Brothels, you think at a film convention you want to see the film maker in there you want to see the film maker suffering and undergoing an ordeal and Michael Moore sort of does, because hes chasing down all these people. And to be this sort of character you become this personality and society loves that; the film maker that becomes somebody and you know there's this convention and I didn't want to do that. I didn't want it to be about me at all. I didn't want to be in it. And I definitely didn't want that so. So that was the first you
know, that was unusual for you knwo to just have a straight educational documentary 6 years ago, the film had to be really good to get attention. But hose weren't the kinds of films getting attention. Today, of course everyone is making educational films. I also think
there's this other choice I made as a film maker, like the narrator in the film is the woman who started off as an assistant editor and associate producer and she has a very nice voice and a beautiful voice I'm listening to her going I really like her voice, what do you think lets use hers? So, I didn't even want to use a celebrity for the narrator because I didn't want it, I didn't want people to think this was something coming from out there, pretty well I wanted it to be grass roots and people feel like I can do that I can relate with that. It was very deliberate. But you know the films that get more approval  and attention from the media are films that ultimately become commercial films with celebrities endorsements with celebrities in them and my film isn't that because that isn't what I wanted so. You know and I like Michael Moore's films and hes very controversial and
you know, that always helps and the more controversial you can be, the more publicity you get, and also he was, you knwo hes done a lot of work and he did that TV show and you know i think his whole background. Like hes sort of, very um, i mean you know hes sort of working class roots sort of um, gives him a cache in terms of sort hes personally, hes in there personally attacking things, which I think is great but I didn't want to do that because that's not in my personality. I wanted to remain private and not have it be about me. Yeah and also I think that you knwo, the foods thing is, you know people didn't, you know years ago there was snobby, people weren't thinking about food politically. They were thinking there's snobby Berkeley food and there's vegans and there's this and there's that but there's not much people paying attention to the food system. No one
was doing it, you know? And then you've got Food Inc which is sort of the one that's got there you know like 5 years late [laughs]. And that s like a commercial, that like an infomercial with celebrity endorsements and Hollywood has sort of tried to appocreate the...

MyDocumentary.ca:Subject matter.
Deborah Garcia:Subject matter! I think they had put a lot of money into it but I don't knwo that they, they had seeming success but I don't know they had real success. don't But you know they sort of, you know came late after those people who already knew stuff because they had already seen the film but I think you know, you know I think in
terms of changing peoples lives, I think that grass roots film that you know your neighbour gives you that changes the way you eat. Even if its not something that seems commercially successful its actually more powerful because your getting it from some,you knwo your not getting it from an advertisement and its putting a lot of money into a
promotional budget and there are different ways for people to get information and I was actually pretty happy with this, with that idea that I could step back. And you knwo I got a lot of support for the  film you knwo I've done lots of interviews, screenings and all kinds
of things. So, but its you know, I don't know  i was kind of going against the trend by doing something that wasn't celebrity oriented or film maker ordeal oriented and you know what I mean?

MyDocumentary.ca:I know you must talk to a lot of people and I know also the movie was quite life changing for people that I know. I'm just wondering, do people report to you they have difficulty shopping? It seems that the more you learn about food and what's going into our food and everything, the more difficulty there is to shop?
Deborah Garcia:Right, well that's the thing you know, I actually, I'm a big believer in organic food so I, for me organic is really, I just know all these, i look at somebody, I know so much about food and I have so many friends who are scientists and you know. You look at some of these foods with 27 different chemicals on them. You know, but it,
so you know I think that people try, people you know say I'm going to go organic and they you know, they sign up with CSA and they you know they, they just become more careful about what they eat and I think that people, you know I think people need to, personally I think people should stop eating so much processed food and start eating simple raw food. So, I'm kind of a total, I'm not a foodie, I'm not like, you know fancy food but I just think we need to just get back to basics in the food department but I think the other thing is with this film, especially since a lot of people, I mean so many people have emailed us and told us that now they shop farmers markets and they go through CSA and you know they buy organic and its so much easier now to access good food, than it was 10 years ago, I mean, 10 years ago if you had a health food store, you know a health food market or something near you, you could get it you know but otherwise you were lost. but this pressure of these people who want healthy food has really changes the food system.  You know even this whole thing that Michelle, Michelle Obama's doing and you know, know your farmer and more fruits and vegetables and that's because more and more people
demand that stuff. And so we are actually, we have changed the food  system. We people who eat and care, they're responding to us and I think the more we do that, the better. I mean even these big companies like Bon Appetit that, not the magazine but the food company that delivers food to the you know, lots of universities and school and
lots of corporate campuses and stuff. The people that they feed say, "we want local food", "we want organic food". So they've changed how they buy. So that means they buy from smaller farmers and local organic farmers and so its just this kind of really positive feed back loop that again has kind of taken place totally under the radar. The government hasn't done anything to help with that stuff, right? its all people. So, I think its you know tricky but I think you know if people stop eating processed food which means they have to cook you know more. Although you know there could be very good fast food, Mexican food can be great fast food. Middle eastern food like tabbouleh and you know I'm not against fast food I'm against junk food.  I eat fast food, I you know, I knwo a good burrito place, I know is not using I know they care about where they are accessing their corn. So its not GMO corn. You know I think that stuff is great and I don't think that people need to slave over a stove for you know 2 hours every night just to eat decent food, but I think that you know, for me I think the next step is for fast food to be, you know to access more food that people can see is fast food but that's healthy food, you know. Fast food doesn't necessarily mean your going to be eating burgers and coke, it can be other things and I think that, you know I think that is going to be the wave of the future is like food cards and things that people can do so they can, if they have a busy schedule that they can still, you know, feel like they are nourishing themselves.

MyDocumentary.ca:Well, Italy has this slow food movement you've probably heard about and...
Deborah Garcia:Yeah I've done a lot of stuff with slow food and I think that's great and I believe in you know I think that's really important and local producers and variety and but I also think that a lot of people realistically i mean you know, it takes a lot of time to
cook. And I think people can and they got into the habit of cooking and you know that cooking is fun and its great to hang out in the kitchen and you don't need to, and that's one of the only things about this economic downturn is that people are cooking more. And you know, instead of going to the mall, like for young people, instead of going
to the mall you know, charging up your charge card with a bunch of clothes you don't need, then spend the afternoon with your friends in the kitchen making pizza from scratch or something. Cooking can be fun and people end up in the kitchen, you know and people want to warm up the kitchens and lets let people do what they want to do and that's a happening movement and I love slow food and I've done a lot of stuff with slow food and shared my film with the slow food film festival and shared it at Cara Madre and I think that's wonderful and I think that not everybody, you know, it doesn't necessarily need to be as precious as people, you know, I've been to these slow food events and people
you know, I mean they are going into these talking eloquencey of the tastes of the various things that they're tasting and I mean I think that's great but I'm like OK, OK, not everyone is that interested in the making of food you know. Sort of you know kind of, this special
little, this special thing that you know I think that it is possible to be, to eat kind of a simple healthy diet. And not have it be, this kind of uh...

MyDocumentary.ca:Religious Experience.
Deborah Garcia:Yeah religious experience. [Laughs].

MyDocumentary.ca:Well, you know, you can buy organic tabbouleh that you add hot water to and you've got a prefect meal in 3minutes. You can add feta cheese and organic tomatoes and parsley and its delicious.
Deborah Garcia:Now see exactly, and its, I think that now we're talking and I think that is exactly what everybody needs to realize. That you don't have to eat, that you don't have to bake your own bread, unless you really really want to.

MyDocumentary.ca:So there's a couple of things here, IMDB says there's a factual error "The narrator claims, during the scene showing the Government", and I'm quoting them here, "Government seed bank, that companies can patent old seeds simply by being first to the patent office." This poster says that, "This is not true, the patent office only grants patents to newly discovered or newly created seeds", which one is true?
Deborah Garcia:Well, I'll give you an example, there was um, there was a um, a seed that grew a yellow bean, it was a yellow bean seed and a guy brought it up from Mexico, and he took it to the patent office and he put a patent on it, and they granted the patent. But a lot of people, some people challenged that patent because that meant the people of Mexico actually couldn't sell it without paying the patent fee. And so I think they ended up rescinding the patent but its actually you know, there's a theory of whats patentable and then there's the reality of whats patentable. And you know if someone claims its a patent thing that is you know that is, that is that has you know been around um, you know and the other thing is you can change one little thing and get a patent on it. And the most important  thing about the patenting of seeds is that they are actually patenting the DNA. its a different you now there are several different ways of patenting things. The plant protection, it used to be that you could patent seeds and plants, you could, it wasn't really a patent but you could call a P, i think its called PBV you could patent it but you, farmers could trade it, and you could replant you know it didn't happen to subsequent generations but you could, farmers could plant and you could do research on it. Those were things that you could do. The thing about what they  are doing with the seeds now with these
utility patents is yeah, your not even allowed to research those seeds without getting permission from Monsanto. So that's, the way that patent law reads, that person is right. but the way that it actually works is, they have patented stuff that they just found, and turned in and no one else had patented it. you know? that's the problem. And you
know, can you patent life?  and that's like the breast cancer gene. They didn't invent the breast cancer gene but they patented it, one of the genes responsible for breast cancer and that's a lawsuit now, they have a lawsuit going for that will end up in front of the supreme court and the supreme court will decide, can you patent life? Oh, it's very complex but, its the system, the system, the way that the system is working is you know, the way the system is working doesn't really relate to how you think the system would work when you read whats patentable. You know its supposed to be non obvious. But these seeds are not non obvious you know, and i think that the tricky thing is that its um, you know, you do get patents for these things and you know people can go after these patents and can get people to rescind it then patent them. Soy I guess soy things in Europe invent who Dona Chiva who is a friend of mine, they spend hours for like 8 or 9 years fighting that patent and they finally got that patent rescinded and for that reason, you know that it was non, that they couldn't patent it because it wasn't new. So the patent office is just, you know they started allowing the patenting of life you know because for the
genetic engineering thing. then it kind of bleed over to things that were non Genetic Engineering and you know there was never any clear, there's never been any clear definitions on on you know but it was, what they say your supposed to have in order to patent things is unfortunately is not the way the patent office has been defining things.

MyDocumentary.ca:So, I'm wondering about, you know how the way that they splice genes, how has that changed, will that change or is there another way to introduce new genetic material into a gene you know without introducing a virus?
Deborah Garcia:Yeah there is. You know there's a lot of genetic engineering going on and the world doesn't want it. They are trying to figure out other ways to do it and one way is they do is kind of like a mutagenics where you kind of um, you know you change the nature of the seed using, I don't know what they use, they use chemicals they might use radiation, see I did an experiment on this when I was in high school [laughs]. You know where you change the seed  using, that's what kind of exciting now is they're using technology to use what they call, markers? Identifying markers? Like you have these
marker genes where you, you can mark the gene and you can read it, you can see whether or not your gene got in there.

MyDocumentary.ca:Yeah I was just watching that, actually the gentleman
who was in your movie, was in another movie, was just talking about that These new marker genes.
Deborah Garcia:Yeah and its kind of exciting starting to bring things out that they've gotten so you can enhance the quality of something you want whatever you know whatever quality it is that you want it to have, you want to have bigger food or you wanted have you know this or that then you know you can use technology to find those things and not have to genetically engineer them. And it makes the breeding process faster and more efficient, which is great and a lot of people are doing that. It doesn't mean that we have to leave technology behind but i think that the genetic engineering because, people don't like it and its actually not, its kind of difficult you know what choice there is to make because  the way they genetically engineer seeds is they create 10's of thousands of monsters and you choose the one that doesn't look like a monster, you know. And so this idea of bringing in this marker identified breeding, where you can more quickly enhance,
you know you can more quickly find out that the traits you want to get in, you know you want to breed in have actually gotten in there and I think that's great and its exciting its also you know there's nothing in that process that is going to um, you know going to be weird.

MyDocumentary.ca:What surprised you the most in making your movie?
Deborah Garcia:The Future of Food? Well, um I guess, you know, I think the thing that...while I was making it or while it came out?

MyDocumentary.ca:Well either or, I mean I like...
Deborah Garcia:Well, I think making it what was a little surprising was how complex the topic was and how challenging it was to actually distill it and its funny because I read that book and um, Guns, Germs and Steel, you knwo which is a great book, very thick and complicated and stuff and so as to how um, agriculture developed, and so I read it
and you know who wrote the, like the first um, yo know opening of the film, the first paragraph you know the opening of the film so I wrote it. I wrote out the narration and I showed it to my editor and she cracked up and shes like slash slash slash slash slash slash [laughs]. OK, that like way too long and way too wordy. I said Oh OK back to the
drawing board. So what I ended up writing I was like 10,000 years ago people began planting and saving seed. Agriculture flowered and civilizations were born. [laughs] So that's what I got, that's what I could do from that whole bit that I spent a week reading. What surprised me was how important it is to distill the information and there's ways to say things that you know the tricky thing is with something like this where you want to be really accurate is you have to pair away and distill and you have to narrow something down so that you have the most efficient way of saying it and its still true, you know what I mean? Because sometimes you cut stuff out and you, you know you have this thing and you edit it so much that its not true. I mean its true its just sort of not um you know you leave too much out if you cut it so the challenging thing was how to distill it to the minimum amount of words and still have it be absolutely accurate. And you know sometimes using just one word, you know or in the film, just one idea you know its very tricky, and people you know, and I found that one of the wasn't like a big problem but one of the things I noticed is when you know people would cover the film and do media and
they would interview me and they would, they would kind of you know, whats the word I am looking for? They would sort of rehash what I had said but they would, oh whats the word? Paraphrase!

MyDocumentary.ca:Paraphrase, yeah.
Deborah Garcia:And then in the paraphrase they got long because they would include something that wasn't accurate or they would think that like, or they would sort of think that they would genetically engineer round up ears into round up ready cobs. And you know its kind of amusing and I realize just how hard I had worked you know and that  even changing a few words, all of a sudden your into some realm where something is like, well that is just totally inaccurate. So, always the tricky thing is how to pair it down without losing the truth because you cant you know, sorry this its true but oh yeah there's
this and there's that and what about this. And that of course is just, in a film you cant do that. And then as far as a film coming out, I was really you know, you make a film and maybe you are just going to have 5 people see it at a festival. I was really surprised at how popular it was.  was surprised at how many people loved the film and saw it over and over and was showing to all their friends and I mean, you know like really straight people and old people and you know hip people you know, like super hip film makers. You know there's like "oh I'm gonna show this to my friends" you know? [laughs]. Its very
heartening cause I wanted to make it acceptable to every kind of person and it was my goal  was to make a house nite in Kansas and show to my church group and well opening at Film Forum in New York. Recently we've been getting a lot of emails from Christians you know? I don't know who, there's some christian people that are really
enthusiastic about The Future of Food, so we have a lot of people calling us wanting to buy the grass roots screening rights to show to their church groups which is really wonderful. You know and some of these people that they call on they really are nice old ladies and they are like "well my neighbour told me about this and..." and I love it.

MyDocumentary.ca:What did you shoot the film on and what did you edit it on?
Deborah Garcia:Uh we shot it I think Beta, no. God, OK I cant remember. Beta?... Well we edited on a Final Cut pro on a Mac. And we shot it on Beta. I cant remember what it is.

MyDocumentary.ca:What are you shooting your new movie "Soil" on?
Deborah Garcia:Its a, we're shooting it in HD.

MyDocumentary.ca:You are? OK.
Deborah Garcia:ts a Panasonic camera in HD and its great!

MyDocumentary.ca:[laughs]
Deborah Garcia:And again Final Cut Pro on a Mac and its um you know, it looks great.

MyDocumentary.ca:We like to ask people the total number of hours they you shot vs. the final length?
Deborah Garcia:I think with the future of food we shot 70 hours and we ended up with a 90 minute film. And this soil film we've shot,  I'm at 100 hours and we'll probably shoot another ten at most and it will pick up, and it will probably, maybe be a 2 hour film.

MyDocumentary.ca:Can I call you to talk to you about, "Soil" when you
release it?
Deborah Garcia:Yeah., No yeah that's going really very well. That's pretty exciting. We shot in India and in Egypt and in the UK but it was kinda really fun doing, getting the crew over to these places and getting everyone together and you know working with fixers and it was quite, quite an adventure.

MyDocumentary.ca:How many people in your crew?
Deborah Garcia:Well, there's the sound man the cameraman me and my associate producer, who was young, she started working for me right out of college. And I taught her how to be a production manager and shes really good at the at kind of stuff anyways but I didn't know that she would be necessarily but, I said OK our setting up your
setting up the shoot and we're shooting in India and getting all the permits and all the stuff and it was pretty hysterical you know she had to wake up at 2 in the morning and Skype the fixer over there, but you know it was, some people just have this ability to just get, they
are good at that they are good organizers so. I kind of got a whole bunch of  young people working for me now and they're, you know, they're really good with technology and  they're motivated and you know its fun. They, its kind of nice to see that generation, they're very creative but they're very serious. But they do such good work I mean they're very well organized and they're responsible so that's,  I've been fortunate in that. I found great people to work with so that's been fun.

MyDocumentary.ca:We've got one more question, that we ask everybody and it might seem a little off topic but, I think its right on the topic, and that is; Intelligent design or evolution and why?
Deborah Garcia:Well I think they don't necessarily exclude each other for me. I think, I don't know, for me I think I just feel like if something is intelligently designed it will evolve. You know what I mean?

MyDocumentary.ca:Is there, are there cases of positive evolution? I know there are scientists, a lot of scientists and yourself included, since we've, in order to genetically modify and organisms you now you currently have to add a virus, and I've seen all this scientific talk on mutating tapeworms, and you know basically what difficulty they face in doing that. I'm just wondering are there enough successful examples of positive evolution?
Deborah Garcia:Well, maybe humans [laughs]. Yeah I don't know I think its um, you know my concern is I think I don't know, you know, I don't really see, I guess for me, you know I guess i feel like you can believe there is benevolent power in the universe and also believe that we're evolving. I don't see those as mutually exclusive. I think what we'll see more is devolution, you know? I think we are kind of devolving now. And that is a real concern you know? I think we're, I think politics is devolving and you know I think that for me the concern is that were not you know, becoming more,you know were not becoming more intelligent and more you know, becoming better humans, I think because of all our, the stress of this technological world you know is people are getting less civilized and that's, that to me is, you know i think this idea of the survival of the fittest, its kind of, its kind of, its kind of simplistic, you know? Cause I don't know, I think the reason I got interested in soil was this idea of mutualism. That in order for the organisms in the soil to exist, other organisms have to exist. The plants exist with the fungi, you know and with the other organisms there is a mutualism. And other than one of those organizations having to dominate the others is that we have to develop this sense of mutualism. And that is what will help us evolve,if we all evolve together. Cause if it turns into wall street, because wall street had become so horrible, "well were the biggest building we can do whatever we want cause that's the way nature is" well that is not the way nature is. Nature is much more mututalistic. Naturally I don't know if they're asking, I don't know if they are on
the right track at looking at it, you know?

MyDocumentary.ca:Wonderful well, this has been a great experience I thank you very much for your time.
Deborah Garcia:Thank you. And get back to me about the soil thing because that a very
interesting topic.

My Documentary Interview
Film: Electric Purgatory - Fate of the Black Rocker
Interviewee: Director Raymond Gayle
Interview Date: January 12, 2010

Dixon Christie discusses Electric Purgatory: The Fate of the Black Rocker with director Raymond Gayle. They discuss the circumstances and challenges that inspire a film maker to become the voice of the unheard.

Check out www.ElectricPurgatory.com for details. To order the DVD online, go to http://www.microcinema.com/ or you can buy it in stores everywhere.

MyDocumentary.ca:Alright, great. So, we first like to have our directors introduce themselves and give us a little bit of an idea of what inspired you to tell this story?
OK. I'm Raymond Gayle. I've been in and out of theindustry for I guess the last...15 years. And this is my first feature, I guess documentary. I guess what inspired me to do it was, I`m a fan of all the bands and I was just kind of curious as to why most of them didn`t really get the, I guess the acclaim that matched their musical prowess. And so, it kinda lead me to you know meeting with some of them, after shows, and kinda actually forming a brotherhood so to speak, I guess was the thing with the bands.

MyDocumentary.ca:Are you familiar with James Spooner?
Yes, I am.

MyDocumentary.ca:Yeah, we've had the chance to talk to him a couple of times and I know that you guys probably would have a lot to talk about. What part of the country are you in?
I'm in Texas.

MyDocumentary.ca:Yeah, so he's in New York and he's shared your, your reverence for the cultural, well for the impact of black musicians and also the irony of having built up rock and roll and yet not really received the acclaim that white people seemed to have taken for it.
Absolutely.

MyDocumentary.ca:Yeah so, tell me. Being from a film background yet not having directed any films; tell us about some of the challenges that you faced, you that you knew you were going to face when you started thinking about making this movie?
Really, I was just wondering actually about the financial aspects. Because we tried to get started on this I guess in what I want to say was '02. And this was right after of course, post 9/11 and of course, the ENRON debacle affected a lot of the non-profit entities. In Texas especially. For whatever reason, funding for the arts really wasn't available when I first started. So that was a challenge, a major challenge. And the other thing was, initially just trying to cover all of the bands that I wanted to cover. And, you know, the logistical challenges that was encompassing them. Actually, I got lucky because some of the, you know basically I bi-passed a lot of the management and went straight to the artist. So, that was a big help in getting things done in a timely fashion. Um, let's see. In terms of after, it was basically just getting a lot of the clearances for the media and some of the video footage, that was tough. A lot of research and I was pretty much doing that on my own basically.

MyDocumentary.ca:I'm about to ask you a bunch of that and I'll get into the details of it. Once you started how long was your shoot schedule? Or did you really have a set, definitive you know time frame to make this movie?
You know at first I was, you know pretty naive, I wanted to get everything wrapped up in a year. But of course as you know, we began principal photography and that was just not going to happen so, at that point I just wanted to make the best film I could make and I didn't really worry about putting pressure on myself to complete it. I just wanted to make sure I was thoughrough enough, you know, and covered as much area as I could. Be true to the message in the artist. So, basically I guess, after the initial wake up call I kinda didn't worry about time or schedule at that point.

MyDocumentary.ca:Knowing who would be watching your movie and again having such a respect for the people, and your heritage I suspect, which, I mean who could find a subject that they would want to respect more? Tell us about some of the challenges in being historically, and you know being accurate throughout the movie?
Yeah, that was tough. You know, I mean I wanted to be fair and I didn't want this to be you know, construed as angry black men sounding off at you know, the path you know that was given them as they go on in their careers. That's why I tried to go find people who were scholars in their area of you know, knowledge pertaining to you know African American events. It was tough you know but basically again it was journalists and musicians and they assure you and you pack and do the research yourself and see if they're legit. And I just really got lucky [laughs]. Those were the people who really knew what they were talking about and it made my life a lot easier.

MyDocumentary.ca:Once you started putting together your final cut did you have an advisory committee or a review board to make sure you know, those intelligent people you had spoken to had been 100% accurate? For example you might have gotten a quote from someone that they believe and you believe to be right and then later discover that indeed that wasn't the case?
You know to be honest with you I didn't really have an,well I guess the advisory committee would be my wife [chuckles] you know.

MyDocumentary.ca:[chuckles]
And anything that strayed along the lines of, "should I keep this in" or "is this sectionally correct", I tried to stay away from. Because a lot of things; there's a game of you know he said/she said, you know its tough. It's tough to kind of dispel some things or you know, prove or validate. I just tried to stay away from the grey areas as possible, so I could avoid all that, you know?

MyDocumentary.ca:Now you've got interviews with Fishbone and other great artists but I'm just wondering about Little Richard or Prince did you try to get out to those guys?
Yes, actually I interviewed Little Richards drummer. And of course he gave me the contact. Well actually first we stopped Little Richard and I was denied due to the fact that they wanted a considerable amount of money upfront for him to do a sitdown interview and then of course after that they wanted a percentage of the gross. You know before he would even blink at me. I kind of had to go in a different direction with him and so I got his drummer which, you know, he kind of shook around some things. It wasn't you know, little Richard but again I reached out to him. As far as Prince, he's a mythical creature, hes tough to get ahold of and I went through several of his subordinates and that didn't happen. I know he seen the film and I know he apparently doesn't have a problem with it. He's very...how should I say this? He's very...you now in terms of his image and likeness he likes to stay on top of that, he likes to make sure things are presented in a, you know, a light that he approves of I guess. You know, like I said, trust me he was one of the main ones that I wanted,Lenny Kravitz was another one, his people actually denied me. They said he didn't have room in his schedule to do this film but, I reached out to people, definitely.

MyDocumentary.ca:Did you see the interview Prince has done? like I haven't really seen many interviews but I'm trying to find the interview that he's done with Tavis Smiley? He's done a couple amazing...
Oh, absolutely. Oh yeah oh yeah oh yeah. I have every Prince interview he's ever done.

MyDocumentary.ca:Oh you do? OK.
I'm a fan. [Laughs]

MyDocumentary.ca:Alright. So, let's look at that for a second, there's Little Richard who has you know not been shy about saying that Rock & Roll owes him billions and you know he's only going to talk about that if he's getting paid and...I mean, there's an irony in that isn't there?
You know, exactly. And being a black man, that kind of rubbed me the wrong way 'cause you know, here I am; I'm putting my livelihood on the line to shine the light on this important topic and you know, at times I felt I didn't really get a lot of support from people who should have been 100% behind it, you know. You know, it's so cliche "Oh, I`m an artist and I don't do this for money" but realistically, do I want the film to be a success? Of course! But I didn't really go in thinking that, I just wanted to tell the story of what's been going on, the artists and everything else would be gravy as far as I was concerned and I, again when you reach out to certain artists and they don't find it compelling enough or they don't take time to you know devote to the project then it's a little disheartening because I'm fighting for them, you know? And everything that they are talking about, I was fighting for in the film, so.

MyDocumentary.ca:I think I totally feel what you're saying, but in their defense I think its always a matter of 'show me'. I believe when you do part II or whatever, you send them a copy of the DVD and they're going to, they're really going to see what you're doing is real, they're gunna feel it. Like you say about Prince, if he doesn't know, I know he knows that going on Tavis Smiley he's going to be represented the way that he wants and otherwise, he doesn't care right?
[Laughs] He ensued me you know, so that's a good thing. I mean he's quick to really, stay on you know his image on the Internet and you know just in media. And I've heard from his people that you know, he dug the film and that's great I mean, you know, because I consider him truly like a brother I never had. And I'll always look up to him and he was actually the first artist,that was the first concert I went to; Purple Rain concert. I think that was '86, '85? I was probably 7th grade; 12-13 years old. Changed my life forever.

MyDocumentary.ca:Have you considered the irony of Prince's success as its just opposed to the subject matter of your documentary? I mean really he is out of hundreds of thousands of examples you could make he is the one super...he`s the complete and polar opposite to the unsuccessful, so many unsuccessful African American bands and look at what happened to him and what he had to do with it. Becoming a slave...considering himself a slave to his record label and turning his back on the labels, essentially, eventually pushing the industry to really change?
You know, I think...Well I can't really speak for him you know I think for someone like Prince its a little more disheartening to see bands, like U2 for example to really expand their sound and take you know chances; musically. And have the support of the label and the media at large. And you know, when [Prince] tries to deviate from you know what's expected, then all of a sudden hes crazy and hes you know not putting out good material and... you know its a little bit of a double standard. I mean, you know Sting? You got to love sting to death, hes got a hell of a policy but Sting, when he did his jazz album; The Dream of the Blue Turtles, and Nothing like the Sun. To me, that was like the critics you know favorite album at the time and you know Prince put out a Jazz CD I think it was N.E.W.S., people try to tan it, you know they're all "what is he trying to do?" you know and "his hearts not in it". Its just, its just difficult. It was difficult for Prince I think to really kinda branch out like with something contemporary and you know theres really no reason why he can't have the same liberties as some of his peers.

MyDocumentary.ca:Now you spoke earlier about some of the licensing challenges. Tell us about licensing and about specifically, Hendrix... the Hendrix and Prince footage that you managed to include.
Well basically before I you know got a lawyer, you know people were just trying to go through the roof with prices in terms of the licensing. Once I got an attorney, all of a sudden things were a little bit more manageable. In terms of the Prince and Jimi Hendrix footage; first off I got the full support of the Hendrix Foundation. I  mean his nephew is actually attended Morehouse, we had a screening there I think it is in '07, and he loved the sound. His mother is the one that.. Janie Hendrix, she controls the estate. You know, they totally you know, support the film and asked me, you know told me if I needed anything let them know. So with the Prince footage I mean I went through Historic Films and got that secured and did all my music licensing through Diamond Time. And again there was a process, a tedious process, but you know it wasn't as bad as I thought it was going to be. It's just a lot of negotiations and I'm an artist, not a business person persay. And I mean, you know...and its very...that's not the most enjoyable process [laughs] of film making; to deal with all the negotiations. I mean its tough but you know, you have to do it, it has to be done so. If I could give I guess any advice to film makers out there then I guess its just to you know, just make sure the business side is taken care of, so you can sleep at night. And like I said, getting a lawyer really kinda helps you negotiate the minefield of licensing [laughs]. Just kinda simplifies it and makes things a little bit easier.

MyDocumentary.ca:You chose the release the movie on YouTube. I'm not sure where else you've released it but, its had 330,000 views and while your getting your message out there do these views affect or impact one way or another recouping your expenses?
Sure, basically you know I went, lets talk about distribution. When we were finished with the film and did the festival circuit and that, you know, we were inundated with several offer from traditional distributes and they were just really ridiculous. Bad deals, I mean just things like rights for 10 years you know they wanted rights across the board, broadcasts, you know home video. They had everything without any advance and no guarantees. So I was contacted by Cinetic Media , which is not film fest, but the cinematic, they're a powerhouse in distribution in Hollywood and they were checking into film, and they had a unique marketing strategy in terms of releasing films in the digital realm and that excited me. We were selected by YouTube for their Screen Room, which is a, you know quite an honour. We were featured during black history month. I guess it was February of last year. We do get a percentage, you know of revenue comes from the hits. Its  really an afforded expense for the much needed exposure in my opinion. But actually, to continue, we are actually having a world wide release now on DVD and signed with MicroCinema Int'l. And they are releasing it to ALL retail outlets, so I'm excited about that.

MyDocumentary.ca:So tell us about some of the added value on the DVD? So, when people go and pick it up, what can they expect in the way of bonuses and features?
Well I think the big thing is we have an exclusive interview with H.R. of BadBrains. And for those people who are fans of that great band, then H.R. is a you know, an unique individual and he rarely does interviews and he was willing to you sit down and discuss you know the bands history and such which I am very thankful for and... We also have deleted scenes and we have extras, concerning some of the bands, with a section called The New Breed and theres spotlighting of some bands that we feel will make some noise in the future. Bands that are called, God forbid. Mark on Your Mirror, you know,  they're like the [laughs] the new version of Metallica they come out and they`re hungry and they're like mean and hungry and rough and you know, I love them. Great gig, watch out for them.

MyDocumentary.ca:What surprised you most in making this movie?
Oh, what surprised me most? Um...You know i just think how personal some the artists got with me during interviews. I mean, you have to understand, I mean doing this... I mean I'm like interviewing like people I grew up you know idolizing. You know, I mean these are like heroes of mine; Fishbone and 24/7 Spyz are really calling me. These are, you know, I listen to their albums and CDs and what not and to be able to go in their homes and be treated like family and have them open up to me. That was, you know, that was the really the most surprising thing. They rally, everybody really accepted me and really supported you know, what I was trying to do. So I guess that was surprising. So i guess they're just every... you know they're just regular people like you and me you know, they have families and they have problems. So that kinda opened my eyes to a lot things. like wow you know, but that would probably be it.

MyDocumentary.ca:OK, well we've got a couple of questions we like to ask all our filmmakers and one of them is: What camera did you shoot on and what software did you use for editing?
Sure. Basically I used the XL1 and PD, I think PD150. And I used a TRV900 you know for some last minute interviews, and the platform, editing platform was Final Cut Pro, all the way.

MyDocumentary.ca:All the way. Absolutely.
[Laughs] Yeah, I'm a Mac guy. I'm a little disappointed in the new MacBook pros though. Only 1 firewire port, that's unbelievable but yeah.

MyDocumentary.ca:Yeah, I know. The one I have I bought a year and a half ago. The new MacBook pro is actually not as good as the old one.
Not at all! I don't know what they were thinking? Really, I mean [laughs] I don;t know if they were trying to simplify or what? But I'm a little disappointed.

MyDocumentary.ca:I guess they are going to be releasing a new webbook pretty soon. Like a new 10 inch screen or something. Did you hear about that?
Didn't hear about that, but hey its you know, I've, mac's are the first computers I grew up on. You know and I just kind of stuck with them. And they're just kinda grabbing back at the forefront now, because you know windows you know, no not windows...yeah windows and PC s they just kinda took over for awhile there and, but, so its nice to see them making some noise.

MyDocumentary.ca:Did you do the post production yourself on your mac? Color and audio? Or did you send it out?
Yeah actually I did. And that wasn't through ego it was just out of necessity. I mean um, it wasn't dictated that I had to go ahead and edit it as well so then again most of the money went to getting it live and things and what not yeah I had to go ahead and do that. It was tough because there was not a bad scene for me, there was not a bad interviews, not a bad music footage and  just imagine trying to I think the hardest thing for me was cutting down the performance footage you know what I mean? During the Prince thing that he's doing that, that killer guitar solo doing, Why you wanna treat me so bad? Oh man! Originally I had it in there for like maybe 3 minutes?

MyDocumentary.ca:Yeah.
You know it was tough cutting it down to you know a minute and some change. You know I mean now that was tough.

MyDocumentary.ca:One of the questions that we ask all the film makers is how much film did you shoot? or video of course did you shoot and what  was  your final cut length?
Oh geez, I wanna say I had, God. Man, I wanna say I had over 78 hours of footage, I wanna say.

MyDocumentary.ca:OK.
Yeah you know, and now that, actually the ordinal cut, the festival cut of the film was about an hour and 20.. an hour and 37 minutes. And we chopped that up to an hour and 7.  So, it's brutal you know because like i said you don't want to cut out anything but you know at some point you just have to kinda walk away. You know that my wife, she was the producer on the film and she was really good at setting me straight, you know I'd get on my tangents. That's got to go, so its good to have someone with a fresh set of eyes that can give some guidance when we're at the editing station there.

MyDocumentary.ca:Alright. Last question, we ask everybody is: Intelligent design or evolution? and why?
That's a tough one. [Laughs] You got me on that one man. Intelligent Design or Evolution, Why? I would probably go with evolution just because in my mind its the natural order of things, natural progression. How about that? I'll make it easy for myself. You know, hey. I'm sorry man, that's one of those higher level, medieval, thinking questions there.

MyDocumentary.ca:What are you doing next? What are you doing next? What's happening, I know your re-releasing the DVD coming up, you have any other movie projects in the works?
Actually I do. I have several projects in the product line. But one that's close to me, My Great-grandfather founded a town, he bought a town. He basically had all his brothers, he got his freed all his brothers and sisters, paid for them and moved them to this town in Texas and I wanted to do a piece around that because you know, there's not a lot of heroes in African American cinema. And his story should defiantly be told. And I've been working on it the last, you know just researching the last 3 years for that. So, that's hopefully the next project I will do. Everybody's been calling for sequels to Electric Purgatory and that's also a possibility because some of the bands joined, I don't know if you've heard that 24/7 Spyz, Fishbone, Kings X, Sound Barrier, they've formed a group called ANM. This stands for Anti N***** Machine.

MyDocumentary.ca:Which is a band name that I shouldn't say.
[Laughs]

MyDocumentary.ca:We don't say the "N" word up here in Canada.
[Laughs] I understand, I understand. But yeah, they, they're apparently, I talked to Jimi hazel, lead singer and guitarist, founder of 24/7 Spyz all the time. And that's something that they have been shuffling around right now, and apparently they are going to drop something this summer so, I am hoping to document that because that's the main, you know, one of the goals of the film you know. Try to inspire some of these guys to #1 keep making music, but to maybe even you know join forces you know theres a segment that we talk about having a black Lollapalooza type event, where we get all the black bands together and they tour. This is in the same vein, I mean where all the bands are you know, coming together for the common good, and no ones worried about a percentage of this and that they just wanna do something spiritual with the music and that's a good thing.

MyDocumentary.ca:I was kinda wondering about Derrick Green from Sepultura, he's a gentleman of colour and...
I like how you said that, "Gentleman of colour"

MyDocumentary.ca:[Laughs] I'm a Canadian, what can I say? Anyway, you never got a chance to talk to him? I've talked to  him a couple of times and he's, he would be an amazing interview for you.
You know again, there were a lot of people who didn't get in the film and it wasn't because, you know we were trying to be rude. Its just that alot of times theses guys go over seas and they don't come back for awhile. And so you know in this case, I wanna say I did reach out to them, I cant remember oh no that was the guy from, I'm sorry, it wasn't him, it was the lead singer from sevendust. I'm sorry.

MyDocumentary.ca:Oh, Sevendust. I don't think I've ever talked to him.
We tried to get them, you know, but it didn't work out. There were a lot of bands that you know, we would love to do, but it just didn't happen.OK. I thought if the name, John Witherspoon, is the lead singer for Sevendust.

MyDocumentary.ca:OK.Alright, well hey thanks a lot for your time and best wishes to you.
Best of luck to you.

MyDocumentary.ca:OK.Take care. Peace.
Bye.

Eric Geringus: Clubland

Alan Black: Jackpot Interview

Doug Hawes Davis, the director of the film Caught in the Headlights, talks about how they decided on which people to choose to highlight in the film and also talks about the film dealing with the element of the human relationship with wildlife and his view on the transportation system.

MyDocumentary.ca: We are about to talk to Doug Hawes-Davis, director of Caught in the Headlights. Hi Doug.
Hey how’s it going?

MyDocumentary.ca: It’s super good, how are you?
I’m doing ok.

After being a self-taught filmmaker and creating documentaries for over twenty five years Andrew Garrison, director of the film Third Ward TX, talks about the technical evolution of film making, how involved he became in making the film, and the message behind the making of Third Ward TX.

Mydocumentary.ca: It’s Wednesday March 21, I am talking to Andrew Garrison in support of his documentary Third Ward TX. Hello Andrew, how are you?
Hi good, thanks.

Mydocumentary.ca: Good. First of all, can you tell us a little bit about your background?
Yeah I’ve been making documentaries mostly for most of my life, for over 25 years. I started working with a group of friends after I got out of school and we sort of taught ourselves and then we worked on a bunch of different films. Later I worked for an organization Attalshop which is in the coal fields of Eastern Kentucky where I made documentaries and also shot for other people. It’s a documentary film group primarily, there’s also a theatre company and a recording label and a radio station. It’s in a town of 1100 people in Eastern Kentucky.

Larry Pierce talks about his involvement in the film Dirty Country and how the off-chance of two young filmmakers buying his cassette of dirty country songs ended up with Pierce being featured in the documentary. Pierce also discusses his latest CD and what his wife thinks about his music.

MyDocumentary.ca: Alright we’re just about to interview Larry Pierce in support of the movie Dirty Country and his latest CD with Itis called Pussy whipped, it is April 19^th.

Larry: Yeah.

MyDocumentary.ca: Oh hey Larry?

Larry: Yeah.

MyDocumentary.ca: Hi its Dixon Christie here from MyDocumentary.ca.

Larry: Hey okay.

MyDocumentary.ca: How are ya?

Larry: Pretty good I can’t hear you very well.

Director of the film Girls Rock, Arne Johnson explains how she first became aware of the rock camp and the immediate pull and excitement she felt once learning more about the operation. Johnson also talks about the making of the film and how she instinctively knew which girls would stand out.

MyDocumentary.ca: I’m wonderful. Bring us back to the inception of this idea for you. How were you first inspired to tell this largely female story?
Well actually there’s a couple things. I was at an event, I’m a big fan of the band Sleater-Kinney who is sadly no longer and the guitarist Carrie Brownstein was speaking at this event about art and music and at some point somebody in the audience, I imagine there is always one person like this in the audience, got up and asked her during Q & A you know it really seems like rock and roll is dead do you think there is any hope for music? And Carrie gave them a look like I’m making music right now asshole. But took a breathe and then sort of said well actually I was just up at the rock and roll camp for girls last week and she then gave a sort of speech about what an amazing experience it had been and how the music the girls were making was like nothing she had ever experienced. It was really, really inspiring. That was sort of the first I knew about the camp and her speech really gave me goose bumps and so I called up Shane and we both grew up together in Portland and I’ve know him since we were 11 years old and so we had both grown up with single feminist moms and his sister was gay and had a kid with another gay man and we sort of had lived in these alternative cultures as we grew up that were very much related to a kind of Portland feminism. So when I heard the story and I told Shane we kind of immediately knew who those folks were and we felt that there was not only a good story there but also a good story about something that we had always treasured growing up about the feminist community up there and the feeling was not a particular kind of community like we felt included as boys and always felt like we were part of their mission was including us in the dialogue. So we felt like it was a really good story first and then secondly we also had an instinct about what messages they might be giving the girls and conversely what could be conveyed to the rest of the world so those are sort of the main things. Then once we went up there and saw all the girls perform and stuff it was a no brainer after that.

Jake Szufnarowski talks about his experience as the former booking agent of Wetlands, the now closed rock club and activist centre. The film, aptly titled Wetlands, features live footage of bands that took to the Wetland’s stage, interviews and a look at some demonstrations. Szufnaroski also speaks out about the closing of the club in conjunction with 9/11.

MyDocumentary.ca: We’re here at the Austin Convention Center with Jake Szufnarowski. He’s currently with Rocks Off productions but back in the day he was the booking agent for the Wetlands. We’re just about to go in and see Wetlands documentary. First of all, take us back to your experience with Wetlands.
I started working there when I was 19 years old and I was kind of new to the club business. I kind of didn’t know any other way but looking back on it, it was really a magical club and a wonderful place and probably everything a rock club should have been and more; combining live music of course with the activism and the activism center which was funded by the nightclub. The night club was basically set up to raise money for the activist center to reach out and do social justice causes and direct actions and environmental issues and campaigns.

Ester Robinson talks about the film that brought this producer to pursue his directorial debut with A Walk Into The Sea. Robinson also talks about the strange connections and personal ties to his family the film proved to have and the discovery of a missing family member who had close connections with Andy Warhol.

MyDocumentary: Alright, we are here with director Ester Robinson of the film A Walk into The Sea. Can you please say hello and tell us a little bit about yourself?
Robinson: Sure. Hello, my name is Ester Robinson and I am from Brooklyn, New York and I have a movie at Hotdoc’s called A Walk into The Sea: Danny Williams and the Warhol Factory

MyDocumentary: So, tell us a little bit about your background and a little bit about what you were doing before you decided to make this movie?
Robinson: Well, I have always been a producer, like a media activist. I have a very strange eclectic life. I was one of the principle architects of a program to fund individual artists called The Creative Capital Foundation. Before that I did the first ever digital satellite release of a feature film called The Last Broadcast in 1999. I was also a producer; I produced public television and films.

The renowned music video director Floria Sigismondi talks about the impact motherhood has had on her work and her outlook on life. She also addresses what it’s like to work with Marilyn Manson, her daring self portrait, and her directorial movie debut with the film Behind the Ballyhoo Blues.

MyDocumentary.ca: First of all, what are you working on right now? What’s new and exciting in your work and in your life these days? How has becoming a mother influenced your artistic perspective?
Floria: I've just shot a Living Things video for the song Bombs Below. I have shot 3 video's for them to date. We shot this in a great commune outside LA. The video plays with the idea that we are the sacrificial lambs in the fight for gold. Gold plays a main role in the video. After having a child it has made me aware at how precious life is and how fragile it is and how inhumane the world is... she has taught me to be in the moment because nothing else matters. I now cherish every waking moment of life.

MyDocumentary.ca: And Matt Heath the producer.
Matt: Hey how’s it going?

MyDocumentary.ca: They are the film makers involved in the new movie…
Chris: The Devil Dared me to.

Bob Ray and Werner Campbell talk about the delicate nature of trying to be as un-intrusive as possible while filming Hell on Wheels. They try to capture the true essence of the emerging female roller derby scene, while hoping to change some of the preconceived perceptions about the world of the all-girl roller derby.

MyDocumentary: Alright, we’re here outside The Alamo downtown movie theatre with director Bob Ray and Werner Campbell who just released the movie Hell on Wheels. Can you guys say hello please?
Werner: Hello, my name’s Werner.
Bob: Hey, this is Bob.