PABLO LOBATO & CAO GUIMARẴES (co-directors, Acidente (Accident))

It was about making a movie without a subject. Perhaps this was the most relevant idea behind this project and where our risk resided.

When we began our partnership we had the desire to realize a movie that had in its origins the names of the 853 counties in the state of Minas Gerais, southeast Brazil, the place where we were born and live.

We first made a selection of these names, arriving at 300 or so. We sat together and, like playing a game, began to compose several little poems using the names of these cities written in small paper clippings. In the end, we selected one poem, which became the screenplay for the movie Accident.

Soon we realized that none of us had ever been to any of the 20 small towns selected and this is how it should be until we arrived for shooting.

We arrived in those towns without expectation of what we would find, however we found inspiration in the poem’s storyline. The feeling of freedom was at the heart of the project. Often, everything led us to think that we would not find material for the film, that it wouldn’t work. But something surprising happened in small events that occurred right in front of our eyes. Instead of large events we searched for the tiniest of things. It was exhilarating to find out that there were rewards in following a limbo. We were moving without a linear objective, with careful attention while at the same time completely relaxed.

This was a movie where we had to unlearn how to look.

MARCO WILLIAMS (director, Banished)

I make films about race relations in America.  Race is generally a subject that people would rather not talk about, much less think about. In a sense to investigate or interrogate race invariably thrusts me into a scenario fraught with risk. Sometimes that risk is a situation, a person, a place, and/or an attitude. In every case, I must gird myself internally for the pain that invariably accompanies confronting the taboo of America’s racial legacy.

In Banished, I had to face my own demons and those of others whose views I do not share. One of the towns that I documented, Harrison, Arkansas, is a community where black citizens were “cleansed” from the town in two separate episodes of white mob violence.  So effective was this expulsion that the town remains virtually all white today.  In fact, it has become a magnet for racists, for those who don’t want to live, settle and retire in a diverse community. It is also the headquarters of the Ku Klux Klan. 

This phenomenon of like-minded people living in the community compelled me to interview the head of the Klan.  To conduct the interview, I had to travel out of town, into the foothills.  Driving to his compound was scary. It was a scene out of the movie Deliverance. The closer we got to his place, the fewer houses there were. We were in the middle of nowhere and our phones did not work.  So just to conduct the interview, a personal risk had to be overcome — that of the potential danger to the crew and to myself.

But an even greater risk posed itself once I came face to face with the Klansman — to interview him risked serving his interests.  A camera crew provides more publicity than he could ever afford to purchase. Faced with this knowledge, I chose to conduct the interview. But, I tried my best to confront and challenge him in the most subtle, yet intelligent manner that I could muster. 

In the end, it was a risk worth taking.  Meeting the head of the Klan helped to shed light on the community of Harrison.  As I state in narration, it is easy to scapegoat the Klan.  But the larger question that needed to be confronted was whether the Klan’s presence is symptom or the cause of the town’s negative reputation.

Risk is everything. To achieve one’s goals, to affect change, risk is mandatory.

DANIEL GORDON (producer-director, Crossing The Line)

The subject matter in itself was the biggest risk. Previously, my two films on North Korea had been relatively neutral, but now I was entering a story that connects the governments and the armed forces of the U.S., North Korea, South Korea and Japan.

We were fortunate that we’re British and don’t have a vested interest in the story and so were trusted by all sides to make a nonjudgmental film. To their credit the North Koreans never tried to interfere either with filming or with the editorial. That was also true of the U.S. Army, who co-operated with us to film the army training sequence and to cover the court martial which unfolded during filming.

CHEN SHI-ZHENG (director, Dark Matter)

“Risk? What risk?”

NEWTON I. ADUAKA (co-writer–director, Ezra)

The biggest risk I took was casting mostly non-actors from various parts of Africa and the African diaspora. Ezra’s three main roles were played by Mamoudou Turay Kamara, Onitcha (a mute) and Mamusu Kallon, and these roles were emotionally demanding and psychologically complex. Structurally, the script consists of fragments of remembrances told by these three characters, and, flashing between the present and the past, it was not chronological. This made it even more of a challenge for the actors. Mamoudou never stood in front of a camera before. He is a budding musician whom I came across literally lounging on a chair by the roadside in a Freetown neighborhood. There was something about him. I invited him to an audition. He bared his soul and gave his all. Same with all the other actors in the film. As a matter of fact, same with most of the crew. My producers obviously had their concerns but allowed me to get on with it. I suppose I learned to trust my instincts.

CRISPIN HELLION GLOVER & DAVID BROTHERS (co-directors, It is fine! EVERYTHING IS FINE.)

Glover: This film was funded completely from my own money specifically with what I made from the first Charlie's Angels film. I could not afford to take insurance out on the production. If anything went wrong and we were not able to complete the movie, there would have been no financial refunds for myself. Steven C. Stewart was born with a severe case of cerebral palsy and was 62 years old when we shot the film. Cerebral palsy is not degenerative, but one of his lungs had collapsed prior to shooting. It became apparent that if we did not shoot something soon we may never be able to shoot anything at all. This is also why we shot this film before I completed part one of the trilogy. (What is it? Is part one of the trilogy and It is fine! EVERYTHING IS FINE. Is part two.) Steve ended up dying within on month of completing the shoot. He basically kept himself alive in order to make this film and once we had made it he knew for himself that it was time for him to go. I wish he were here to see the film.

Brothers: I suppose the biggest risk was Steve's health. When Steve first contacted me prior to filming, he was in a nursing home recuperating from a bout of pneumonia and a collapsed lung, at that point Steve said to me "If we are ever going to make this movie it has to be now." Crispin flew out to see Steve and agreed that it was now or never. We had to wait a few months while Steve finished recuperating. I started building the sets and arranging for local crew and Crispin started casting and organizing the production. Later, when we started to shoot, Steve was thin and no longer eating solid foods however our fears for Steve's health were for the most part unfounded, he worked very hard and was up for every task set before him. It must have been exhausting, the temperatures were extreme throughout the shoot, the stage was drafty and dirty, either freezing or sweltering but as long as there were people working Steve wanted to be there. Towards the end Steve's health started to deteriorate again and we had to reschedule one of the shoots, although Steve wanted to work his doctor forbid it. I think naively I didn't realize how mortal Steve was, I just assumed that once we started filming Steve would be fine and ultimately that's how it worked out. I speculate that the film is what kept Steve alive a little longer, at least that's how it worked out...barely.

TOM HOOPER (director, Longford)

Myra Hindley is an iconic figure of evil in Great Britain. She inspires extreme emotions. A film dealing with the man famous for sympathizing with her is unavoidably controversial. The biggest risk I took was that the controversy would distort the issues raised by the film in the very way controversy obscured the nobler aspects of Longford’s belief in forgiveness.

VHS Kaloucha

NÉJIB BELKADHI (director, VHS-Kahloucha)

Being part of this job is already a risky business! And our film is even worse, for it was thought and produced in terms of restriction, economy and independence. We’ve been working so hard, making commercials and TV series to finance our film; nobody sounded interested in it ,and in all cases we weren’t going to wait for three years to raise funds. All our money got into the film; VHS-Kahloucha swallowed all our finances and got us on our knees. But we fought to bring our film to the audience and show it in the festivals as well. It’s been a great journey, for it stuck us to each other; me and my producer have always been the greatest friends on earth, and now we aren’t anymore... We have become brothers. And it’s worth taking this kind of risk even if the film flops. And I think it isn’t. We are in Sundance, hallelujah!