Documentary filming question

trueindie

trueindie

How does one do a documentary that is at its core antagonistic?

What I mean is this:
How do I get the spokes people of companies and organizations that I want to expose to grant me interviews?

This is not like Supersize me where there is one evil mcdonalds corporation. But a bunch of little mcdonalds all conspiring to make you fat. But they all have very nice public images, like film festivals. In the process, some people get rich, and other people waste their lives. But how do I get the little mcdonalds people to talk to me?

I think this is a really vague question. If anybody has an answer, you're a genius. And I thank you.
best,
aveek
 
Do what all of those docu makers to to get interviews... lie. I personally think it's unethical, but it got them results - you could also do it the Michael Moore way and be annoyingly honest about your intentions and don't take no for an answer - hope your insurance is good, you'll get hit often... just make sure you get that on camera!
 
Frankly, I don't think you will FIND anyone who is going to be a whistleblower against the company they work for. Whistleblowers usually find you.

What you may want to do is ALOT of research to support the claims that you are making about...whatever it is you are trying to show. I suppose that is what you will have to do. Then put on your helmet and wait for the fallout.

They may find you to be too small to go after, maybe not. Who knows? But any claims you make better be founded in fact. You also probably want to think like 'them' so that when give a reason why your documentary's assertion is faulty, you can have a response. Make sure your claims are air tight or you have the possibility of being on the wrong side of a lawsuit.


-- spinner :cool:
 
You are not going to get the spokespeople to speak only to your
specific agenda. You may be able to get interviews but you must
tell them what your agenda is. And since your agenda is
antagonistic then you will have trouble getting interviews.

Using Supersize Me as an example. Spurlock didn’t set out with an
agenda - he set out with a concept. There is a big difference
between “Eating at McDonald’s will make me fat” and “I’m going to
eat nothing but McDonald's for a month and see what happens.”

spinner has it right, I think. If you want to find people who are
willing to expose the flaws of a company (or a bunch of companies)
you will have to do a lot of research to find them. I’ll bet they
are out there - if you are upset about it (whatever it is), others
are two.
 
simple version:
- there are lots of government film funds in Canada with millions of dollars.
- Every year they fund movies - by known Canadian filmmakers or with collaborations with known American personalities
- the mandate is to fund local cinema and to grow and develop local talent
- but that doesn't happen because every year the same people get funded.

Now I've met some of the people (two of them) who are in charge of the distribution of two of the funds. They gave great lectures, and encouraged everyone in the audience (hopeless dreamers) to apply. I asked one from the audience that in your website there are stipulations about needing to have this many millions before coming to you. The guy said fuggedabout it.

So after the talk, I went up to him and said I really enjoyed his talk, and would love to talk to him further. With a charming smile on his face he said "do you have a producer?" I said "no." He said, "Come back to me when you have one," gave me a smile and walked away.

My theory is that this guy doesn't want to invest in Aveek. Who the hell is Aveek. If Aveek takes the organizations money and fails, this guy will have to answer for it. So its safer for him, and everybody like him to continue to fund known personalities, so when they fail, and they do, this guy can say, "but look, it was so and so. How was i supposed to know we wouldn't make our money back?" But if Aveek crashes and burns, this guy would not have this same excuse and might lose his job. So Aveek, and anybody like him, will never get funded. But we continue to be encouraged to send in applications, so that he can tell his bosses how many more applications the organization received this year.

That's the gist of it. Not too sinister. That's my theory and I want to talk to these people and ask them what their actual mandate from the govt is and what they're doing about it and how come the same people get funded every year and why worthless people like Aveek are told lies at presentations.

Best,
Aveek
 
So the gist of your dock is that "Organization X" is supposed to be patrons of local/indie filmmakers, however, they don't appear to be doing that. In addition to not supporting local and indie filmmakers, they seem to be more about helping out Canadian and American celebrities/personalities.

trueindie said:
So after the talk, I went up to him and said I really enjoyed his talk, and would love to talk to him further. With a charming smile on his face he said "do you have a producer?" I said "no." He said, "Come back to me when you have one," gave me a smile and walked away.
Click to expand...

Trueindie, this is the nature of the beast. I can't tell you how many dismissive people there are in this business. Indie film is full of people who are more than willing to have you help them out, but have no interest in what you're doing. Everybody isn't this way, but alot of people are.

My theory is that this guy doesn't want to invest in Aveek. Who the hell is Aveek. If Aveek takes the organizations money and fails, this guy will have to answer for it. So its safer for him, and everybody like him to continue to fund known personalities, so when they fail, and they do, this guy can say, "but look, it was so and so. How was i supposed to know we wouldn't make our money back?" But if Aveek crashes and burns, this guy would not have this same excuse and might lose his job. So Aveek, and anybody like him, will never get funded. But we continue to be encouraged to send in applications, so that he can tell his bosses how many more applications the organization received this year.
Click to expand...

That's what an investor IS.

I don't know what to say. I suppose its possible to pull off your premise, but alot of what you're talking about is a given. I mean, its not cool for them to do this, but I'm not surprised that it happens.

I think I need for other posters to weigh in on this, I'm not sure I am getting it yet. :blush:

-- spinner :cool:
 
spinner said:
That's what an investor IS.

I don't know what to say. I suppose its possible to pull off your premise, but alot of what you're talking about is a given. I mean, its not cool for them to do this, but I'm not surprised that it happens.

I think I need for other posters to weigh in on this, I'm not sure I am getting it yet. :blush:

-- spinner :cool:
Click to expand...

I'll disagree with you on one point. An investor looks at the potential return and decides whether s/he wants to invest or not.

This guy's job is to talk to people like me, to seek out indie filmmakers who they can potentially fund. My point is that he doesn't talk to me because it is too risky for "him." He doesn't do his job and talk to me. At the end of the funding round he goes back to his committee and says he still wants to fund more rubbish made by Atom Egoyan. And the committee says bravo. And yet another Egoyan (sp) movie is made in Canada.

His job is to 'look' for people like me, to seek out potential investments. I'm saying he doesn't do that.

I don't think you're trying to be patronizing, but I think you think I don't understand how the business world works. I understand it very well. I'm ex wall street. Abt two years ago I decided to give everything up and learn how to make films. But I understand how financing works. I also understand how this particular guy's job works, only too well. And what bugs me is that s/he he gets away with smiling at indie filmmakers at presentations. So I just want to ask him and his kind a few questions and ruffle his feathers. There's no answer he has that I don't know about.

I'm new to filmmaking. Not Finance :)

Thanks for the insight though. Hadn't really thought about a legal fallout from a documentary. Stupid me :)
Best,
Aveek
 
Oh, I don't pretend to know about finance. And one of the big places that us indies (that means you too, now) don't know is often the 'business' end of what we do.

I have, however, been in the position to ask people and filmmakers about how to do things when they are asked to be on a panel or what have you. When you are looking for practical info and answers and you get replies you can't use. (ask the members about 'pitch events'). You will find alot of information on this site, by the way.

I know he or whoever is supposed to talk to you, but A.) he can't talk to everyone and B.) he can't invest in everyone. He probably looks for a way to weed people out. It looks like this might be how he does it. Indie filmmakers get 'smiled' at all the time, but you sound like you might know more about this guy than I do.


No, I wasn't trying to be patronizing. It's just that you said you were new to filmmaking and I figured maybe you hadn't experienced this sort of thing. No worries :)


-- spinner :cool:
 
Sounds like you have an interesting issue. I don't see a movie in
it, but it seems you t, and that's all that matters.

trueindie said:
That's the gist of it. Not too sinister. That's my theory and I want to talk to these people and ask them what their actual mandate from the govt is and what they're doing about it and how come the same people get funded every year and why worthless people like Aveek are told lies at presentations.
Click to expand...
So grab a camera and go talk to these people. Ask them the questions
you want to ask them. Allow them to say what they want to say. I
suspect you will face some obstacles but that's what documentary
filmmaking is all about.

trueindie said:
This guy's job is to talk to people like me, to seek out indie filmmakers who they can potentially fund. My point is that he doesn't talk to me because it is too risky for "him." He doesn't do his job and talk to me.
Click to expand...
Maybe that's your documentary.

What about talking to the filmmakers who have gotten money and then
talking to filmmakers who have applied and not gotten money? Look what
Michael Moore did when he couldn't get the interview he wanted - he made
a movie about not getting an interview.

That's already been done so that might not be the best approach, but you
might have a doc in there somewhere. Sometimes a great documentary
comes from just shooting. who knows, maybe you have a story in there
you don't even know you have.
 
Hmmm, so you won't get a producer to oversee your project so that you get access to said 'funds'? Which seems a big part of their criteria...

It may not work that way in Wall Street but if that's the way the game is played in order to get an opportuinty than why not get said producewr involved?

Otherwise why not try and get financing from independant investors? Maybe your experience will be better served that way?

Anyhow, all the best with your docu, Directorik as usual has a given you a few good ideas, Jim.
 
You guys are all correct. Maybe there's no movie in it. It's not my daily driving force. It's just something I want to do, whenever I get a chance.

And Jamster, maybe you're correct. Maybe I need a producer. Maybe I should get a producer. But maybe these guys should be speaking to producers and not asking people without producers to waste their time sending in applications.

Maybe they don't have time to speak to everyone. I'd like to know 'who' exactly it is that they speak to on a personal level in any given year. I think that number is exactly zero.

Cheers
Aveek
 
Jamster said:
Hmmm, so you won't get a producer to oversee your project so that you get access to said 'funds'? Which seems a big part of their criteria...
Click to expand...

It's not like I "won't" get a producer. I don't know how to get one. I don't know how one goes about getting one. So far, in the 4 odd films I've made, I thought I was the producer. I paid for everything. I wrote everything. I directed them. Isn't that how most people here are??

What does it mean to "get a producer." I have absolutely no idea what that means. Why would a producer, who is obviously someone more important than me, join forces with me, a nobody? How do I convince him or her to do that? How many people here have done that? How do I do it in Toronto??
 
A producer is not a person, it's a job.

I acted as producer on my last project and it was a nightmare. I'm hoping to get a friend of mine who's interested in film to produce my next film for me.

Harvey Weinstein might be a 'producer' but at our level the producer is the person who puts together the budget, organises funding, sorts of cast/crew/locations/catering/props...etc. They might delegate down but the producer produces the raw materials to make a film, the director directs those materials into a coherent film.

No mystery behind it, anyone can be a producer.
 
Okay, let me elaborate. When I asked this guy, what do you mean, he said, go to TIFF (Toronto International Film Festival), buy one of those special tickets, and then mingle with producers and then pitch to them, then come to me. "You mean buy one of these special passes that cost like $500?" I asked. He smiled and said "yes."

So I have to spend $500 to go to a party to tell people about my project. I have to go to a party where people can afford $500 tickets. So this guy was definitely not talking about producers like you and me. He was talking about 'real' producers, maybe not harvey weinstein, but 'real' people.

Anyway, I'm muddling everything up. It's just a story. I thought it would make for some good emotional fodder for struggling filmmakers. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe everybody here thinks that this guy is right, because this is how things are done. I don't think so. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I should buy a $500 ticket to TIFF this year. It's coming up in September.

Best,
aveek
 
I like to say the producer is responsible for the nouns... Getting together People, Places and Things - and all the associated bits that make that happen, schedules, budgets, etc.
 
It’s clear you’re upset with the way the the Canadian government
funds movies. Maybe there’s nothing you can do about it, may there
is.
trueindie said:
You guys are all correct. Maybe there's no movie in it. It's not my daily driving force. It's just something I want to do, whenever I get a chance.
Click to expand...
To me, this is the key. As long as it isn’t your driving force but
just something you might do when you get the chance says to me
that you aren’t passionate enough about this to dedicate the time
it will take. Not a put down; sometimes an idea isn’t strong
enough to be a driving force.

No offense to Jamster but you do not need a producer - not yet.
The lack of a producer isn’t what’s holding you back. From this
thread it seems what is holding you back is this is not your daily
driving force. You’re upset, you didn’t like what this guy said and
you want things to be different and more fair.
trueindie said:
Anyway, I'm muddling everything up. It's just a story. I thought it would make for some good emotional fodder for struggling filmmakers. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe everybody here thinks that this guy is right, because this is how things are done. I don't think so. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I should buy a $500 ticket to TIFF this year. It's coming up in September.
Click to expand...
In my country the government doesn’t fund any movies so this isn’t
a story that resonates with me. It’s not that I think this guy is right,
but I do believe this is how things are done with the government funds
movies. Maybe you can't change anything, but you can expose it.

Cutting to the chase - anyone making a documentary needs to have
undying passion and perseverance. It’s not an easy task. If four
people on a message board can shake your resolve even a little
then it’s not a task you should attempt.

You’ll know when you’re ready. When this becomes a daily obsession
then nothing will slow you down. No more “maybe” anything - you’ll
stop at nothing to expose this story.
 
Another approach could be to simply conduct an exhaustive investigation into the Canadian film promotion program on your own, as time and motivation allow.

Surely there's a government webpage, llikely with either HTML or PDF documents about criteria. Make yourself fairly versed in all the annoying details to the point where you can go beyond interesting dinner conversation and into boring analysis that takes too long to explain.

When it came time to build a house I discovered I could act as my own general contractor. Didn't need to hire one. I learned all sorts of stuff. Things "normal" people haven't the slightest idea about.
Same idea here.

Start your own blogspot page and it's entirely possible you can become the regional "go to guy" on consolidating the legal goobledy-gok into actionable information.

Seek mupltiple perspectives for content contribution and post it.

Maybe it is all just a big fat fleecing of the people.
Maybe you've been given... less than acurate information.
Maybe the program's purpose has been misconstrued or experienced genuine mission drift or the current program leadership has taken on a new tack that's not working.
Question "Why is it the way it is?"
Find out how much the program is budgeted by the government and how much is actually payed out - and to whom.
Is the program itself in political jeopardy by which political party in opposition to passing it once upoon a time?
What appears to be the total economic activity benefit the tax dollars dispensed actually return to Canadian municipalities?
Is there a better alternative?
Are there factions within the program's leadership?

Dig. Dig. Dig.
Five loonies says in this process you will uncover more than enough material and contacts to make your documentary with all the passion while replacing rancor with insight.

GL & GB


Ray
 
"get a producer attached" - in the UK to get govt film funding you need a 'recognized' producer attached as they want to make sure of an end product. I thought maybe the Canadian system is the same - hence the comment.

I'd love access to the 15 million pounds available in the UK BUT in order to do so there are many hoops to jump through first. I know it's not just a case of talking to someone over drinks into giving me cash without all the necessary forms etc. IF it were a private investor - absolutely yes I'd give it a go...

But govt. money, I don't think so.

All the best with financing, I'm in the same boat but won't bother with such financing unless I can get a producer with a 'track record' on board - respectfully, Jim.
 
Begin here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telefilm_Canada
Goto here: http://www.telefilm.gc.ca/en/funds-...development-production-and-marketing-programs

http://www.telefilm.gc.ca/en/telefilm/telefilm/history

http://www.telefilm.gc.ca/document/en/01/17/2009-2010-Corporate-Plan-ENG.pdf
Total Canada Feature Film Fund ............................................................... $ 93,160[,000]

I see that it is a "Crown Corporation", among many others: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_corporations_of_Canada

Term to become familiar with: Canada Development Investment Corporation (CDIC)
http://www.cdiccei.ca/english/pdf/CDIC_Annual_Report_2008 _Eng.pdf

Go get in trouble TI! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top