Streaming Films

‘Slomo’ Featured in NY Times Op-Docs

Joshua Izenberg’s short Slomo (T/F 2013) introduces us to a former doctor who in middle-age decided to dedicate himself to full-time rollerblading along the San Diego beach boardwalk. This eccentric and eloquent “Slomo” explains himself, raising pressing questions about what we really want in life and the meaning of freedom and happiness.

This film is now available to watch online as part of the NY-Times Op-Docs Series.

Izenberg discussed his interest in this subject in his opinion piece accompanying the film:

I’ve long been fascinated by people who make seismic changes late in life. It goes against the mainstream narrative: Grow up, pick a career, stick it out, retire. I was also curious about Slomo’s concept of “the zone,” a realm of pure subjectivity and connectedness that he achieves through his skating. The only thing Slomo loves more than being in the zone is talking about the zone, so it wasn’t hard to persuade him to take part in a documentary film.

Be sure to check out his full article here.

Posted April 10, 2014

‘Paraíso’ and a Chat with Director Nadav Kurtz

Brothers Sergio and Jaime Polanco and their cousin Cruz Guzman are immigrants from Mexico who work cleaning windows on Chicago’s tallest buildings. In Paraíso (T/F 2012) director Nadaz Kurtz pairs stunning images of the Polancos’ dangerous and fascinating work with their reflections on life’s meaning and what lies beyond. The result is a compelling look at something extraordinary hidden in plain sight.

Paraíso has received awards at Silverdocs, Tribeca, The Chicago International Film Festival, Cine Las Americas and The Seattle International Film Festival. Now this celebrated short film is available to watch online as part of the New York Times Op-Docs series.

I recently got a chance to talk with Nadav Kurtz via phone about his film and its inspiration.
-Dan Steffen

T/F: Could you tell me about the original inspiration for Paraiso?

NK: I was working as an editor in Chicago. One day I saw this guy pop up by my window, clean it and then disappear. That was the first time I thought about “Who are these guys?” and “What kind of a person does this job?”

T/F: How did you first meet the Polanco brothers?

NK: When I started working on the film, I went to different buildings all over Chicago and talked to people who did this work. When I met the Polanco brothers, I was just waiting at the bottom of these ropes where they were working, and they just came down and chatted. I was struck right away by how open they were. They were very friendly and basically invited me to their house that evening for a birthday party for one of their nieces. There was clearly something special about them.

T/F: What’s True/False about your film?

NK: To me the juxtaposition of the two words is about the influence that we have as filmmakers on the situations and people we make films about. Once we are in a situation we influence it. This is against the old-school idea that you could be in a situation and not influence it, that this would somehow be a “true” documentary.

I was interested in how making this doc would be illuminating for myself as well as for them. So I was very open with them about my own thoughts about their work. I asked them questions about topics that they didn’t bring up. Other people have come and done stories on them, from the Chicago Tribune and other news sources. And usually most people ask them things like “How much do you guys make?” and “Are you scared of the job?”, these pretty standard journalistic questions. I was interested in their spiritual beliefs and their relationship to the afterlife, their thoughts about the danger of their job and death. Those were things that I was curious about.

In the process of doing these interviews I think they started thinking about these things in a different way than when we first started. The falseness is that the process itself changed the reality, and even changed how their families viewed their work. Before their wives didn’t really know much about their work and didn’t really think about it. Their home lives and work lives were very separate.

T/F: This focus on the afterlife, is that something that occurred to you right away when you started making this film?

NK: Yeah, it’s something that I was personally interested in, especially around the time I was making the film. It was something that I was thinking about a lot. And then, of course, when you’re up filming on these high rises, it’s a different reality up there. You’re standing there and there’s no guard rail. You have the feeling . . . if a gust of wind came and knocked me over all the things that I think about, all the different problems and joys, can be instantaneously erased.

T/F: Can you tell me how you went about shooting the film, how you got all the amazing shots in the film?

NK: There’s a couple of really wonderful cinematographers Drew Wehde and Chris Markos. Those two did a lot of the filming with me.

Going in I had a plan of doing some of it off the cuff and some of it planned, in terms of lens choices and things like that. But the main thing was a lot of waiting. We got really lucky. I think there was one morning where we got a lot of the shots, particularly the part where they are talking about the afterlife and light is shining into the lens, bouncing off of the building. That was the fifth morning we tried to shoot there. They kept cancelling the work because the wind is too strong. So we kept coming back and eventually we got really lucky. They just happened to be on that side of the building when the angle of the sun was hitting the building in a particular way.

I’ve heard other doc people talk about this, there’s a phenomenon where you keep coming back over and over and over, and then in one hour you wind up getting 90% of what you’re going to use. There’s some weird synergy that happens. You have to put in that time and keep coming back or keep filming, then there are these weird moments where everything just kind of lines up.

T/F: It’s interesting, this sort of crazy dangerous work these guys are doing is sort of hidden in plain sight, we see this amazing work these guys are doing and don’t really even pay any attention to it . . .

NK: Yeah, it’s funny now I always get texts from friends with pictures of window washers working. It seems like once you tell people about the project or once they’ve seen it, they start to notice these people more.

Paraíso_WideExt01

Explore more streaming films from T/F past on our new video page.

Posted January 16, 2014

Over 100 T/F Films Available to Watch Online

Announcing the new True/False video page. Give it a look and browse through over 100 films from past True/False Film Fests available to stream online for free. You can sort by the year they played the fest, or by whether they are a short or a feature. These films are gathered from a variety of sites which legally stream docs, including Vimeo, YouTube, Hulu, SnagFilms, Crackle, P.O.V. and The National Film Board of Canada’s online archive.

videosscreen

We’ve also collected videos of classic docs, musical performances, interviews and much more. Come take a look around and see what catches your eye.

Posted January 6, 2014

‘Aaron Burr, Part 2′ and a Chat with Director Dana O’Keefe

Aaron Burr was a major figure in the American revolution and early republic. But the legacy of our third vice president was ruined forever on July 11, 1804 when he killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. In Aaron Burr, Part 2 (T/F 2012) Burr himself returns to finally clear the air about that fateful day and the events leading up to it. Check out the short below, as well as my chat with the filmmaker Dana O’Keefe, the man also responsible for Vladimir Putin in Deep Concentration (T/F 2013).

-Dan Steffen

T/F: How did you first become interested in making a film about Aaron Burr?

DO: I was initially fascinated by the idea that political figures resolved their differences through this highly ritualized form of combat. And then when it became clear that there were discrepancies in the accounts of the duel, that presented an opportunity to explore the idea that there isn’t really a stable version of history. That it depends on your perspective.

If there was a moment of clarity in conceiving the project, it was when we went to the actual site where the duel took place and realized that it was a parking lot. History, especially in New York, is all around us. It’s sort of hiding in plain sight. Using the actual locations where these things happened and embracing the fact that they looked modern forces the spectator to think about the relationship between past and present.

One thing I soon realized is that I knew absolutely nothing about what really happened during the revolutionary war. In this short period a time a relatively small group of people made a series of decisions which in turn determined what would happen over the next two hundred years.

T/F: What’s True/False about your film?

DO: I think the entire premise is “is there empirical, objective historical truth?” Aaron Burr was arguably as important a political figure as Alexander Hamilton. But he wrote himself out of history by killing another man, who in turn was enshrined as a national treasure.

To me it’s the epitome of how I interpret True/False, playing with these questions of documentary versus narrative. We tried to use a narrative filmmaking grammar to approach a documentary subject.

T/F: Could you tell me a little more about this narrative grammar?

DO: I think the idea was to figure out a way to present historical subject matter in a way that was both dynamic and relevant to a younger audience. The style is very music driven and utilizes highly composed shots, things that you don’t usually see in documentary. It’s very easy in shooting this sort of material to backslide into something that looks stagey or artificial.

T/F: Yeah, it almost feels like a film trailer in some ways . . .

DO:  Yeah, that’s funny, I guess it is somehow, it’s sort of like shorthand. I’ve never really worked extensively with dialogue in films, so a lot of what I do involves music and silent film storytelling techniques, occasionally title cards and things like that. So I try to convey as much as I can visually.

T/F: I thought Burr as a character was quite interesting. You made him arrogant and somewhat unlikeable, even though this is his chance to tell his story. How did you think about Burr as a character and a narrator?

DO: Gore Vidal wrote a historical novel called Burr which quickly eclipsed all of the other source material. The film is heavily indebted to that work in terms of presenting the jaundiced perspective of this guy who sort of wrote himself out of history and therefore has a very critical attitude about the cherished mythology of the period. That book really helped clarify how to portray his psychology.

T/F: Burr’s voice in the film has a weird, sort of otherworldly quality to it.

DO: Here’s a one way of thinking about it. We’re presented with this one version of history which we rarely question, right? And then Burr’s point of view about this incident is completely different, and he presents this version which contradicts the received wisdom. And he does so in a way that at first seems very objective and detached, almost robotic. But I think as the film builds you realize that his point of view is also delusional. Elements of megalomania sort of creep into this impartial narration. Hopefully, it highlights the impossibility of any stable interpretation of a historical event.

 

Posted December 5, 2013

Watch ‘The Waiting Room’ Online

The Waiting Room (T/F 2012) carefully observes the frustration, uncertainty and compassion on display in one overcrowded public safety-net hospital. Watch this timely film online right now thanks to PBS Independent Lens.

 

Posted October 24, 2013

Michel Brault 1928-2013

This week the film world lost the great Québécoise director Michel Brault, an important pioneer in the observational “direct cinema” movement that fundamentally transformed documentary film. Catherine Perreault at the National Film Board of Canada offers a detailed appreciation of his life and works, including three selections from his oeuvre available streaming as part of NFB’s extensive online archive.

You can also watch a short clip from a conversation between Brault and Sean Farnel at the 2010 Toronto International Film Festival. In it Brault discusses the technological limitations of documentary filmmaking in days gone by, and how they forced the director to think on his feet.

Posted September 27, 2013

Watch ‘The Interrupters’ and a Campfire Story From Steve James

One of the most unforgettable films ever to screen at True/False was our 2011 True Life Fund selection, The Interrupters. Steve James’s documentary introduced us to violence interrupters working in the troubled streets of Chicago. These interrupters are part of a program created by epidemiologist Gary Slutkin called Ceasefire (now renamed Cure Violence), based on the thesis that violence should be approached like an infectious disease, where the goal is to prevent each individual case of transmission.

The film’s deep humanism comes from the life stories of the violence interrupters themselves: Ameena Matthews, Cobe Williams and Eddie Bocanegra. All former gang members, the interrupters don’t shy away from their violent pasts, but instead utilize their reputations and gained knowledge to help their communities. We watch as they courageously interject themselves into intense situations, speaking blunt truths and directly confronting the drive for revenge or respect, passions that so frequently lead to acts of violence.

The 114 minute cut of The Interrupters is available to watch for free online through the PBS series Frontline.

The Interrupters was inspired by co-producer Alex Kotlowitz’s 2008 New York Times Magazine article “Blocking the Transmission of Violence”. Director Steve James was moved by this piece because of his personal connection to Curtis Gates, who was senselessly killed in a 2001 shooting. Curtis was the older brother of William Gates, one of the principle subjects of James’s 1994 film Hoop Dreams. Universally recognized as a documentary masterpiece, Hoop Dreams follows two basketball prodigies from poor neighborhoods in Chicago who dream of achieving fame and fortune through careers in the NBA. You can watch this essential film for free streaming online through Hulu.

Steve James returned to T/F this year to participate in our annual event Campfire Stories, an intimate gathering where filmmakers share tales about compelling scenes that didn’t make it into their films. In the clip below, James recounts an incident at a gas station which illustrates the violence interrupters problematic relationship with the police. Campfire Stories was captured on video by our friends at Columbia Access Television.

Posted September 3, 2013

Gimme Truth! ‘Dem Bones’

One of our proudest creations is our signature game show, Gimme Truth!  Every year a panel of three filmmakers gathers in front of a rowdy crowd at The Blue Note to watch a series of short films and try to determine if they are 100% True or 100% False. The whole event is presided over by the irreplaceable master of ceremonies Johnny St. John.

Thanks to our loyal media partner CAT TV you can relive this year’s edition and play along with judges Bill Ross (Tchoupitoulas), Sergio Oksman (A Story for the Modlins) and reigning champion Heidi Ewing (Detropia). In this first clip, you’ll be evaluating the veracity of “Dem Bones” by LeeAnne Lowry and Kirsten Izzett, which explains the effects of a strange medical condition. Good Luck!

Posted August 6, 2013

‘Subway Preacher’ and a Conversation with Director Dennis W. Ho

Subway Preacher (T/F 2011) grants us miraculous access to a very strange place, the life of evangelist Brian Kelly. In lieu of employment, Brian, along with his wife Rose and a handful of other followers, runs a 24/7 ministry amid the daily grind of a New York City subway station. His days are spent distributing Chick Tracts and abrasively warning the uninterested passersby about the perils of hell fire. Around the time photographer, musician and first-time filmmaker Dennis W. Ho began filming, Brian attracted a new follower, a beautiful young woman named Kaitlin. The story that followed, captured by Ho’s camera, is enlightening, infuriating and darkly comedic.

Now, Dennis has made Subway Preacher available in its entirety on YouTube. You’ll find it embedded below along with an interview with Dennis discussing this gritty and oddly poetic piece of non-fiction. But be sure to watch the film first, you won’t want to spoil any of its many surprises.
-Dan Steffen

T/F: Hey Dennis, thanks for chatting with me.

DH: My pleasure Dan.

T/F: So, I first wanted to ask about was the amazing access you had in the film. How did you first meet Brian?

DH: I first met Brian at the Times Square Station after having passed through that station several times and seen the “ministry” and its assorted eccentrics and non-traditional New Yorkers. One day I stopped by and asked if I could take pictures of them for a photo essay. And that photo essay turned into a film.

T/F: Was he at all hesitant about you photographing him?

DH: Actually, he was very enthusiastic. Most of them were quite open to the idea.

T/F: When you first began the project, did you have any notion of the emerging love triangle story line?

DH: Not at all. Through the course of filming, there were at least three story lines I could used for the film. The love triangle turned out to be the one I captured the most completely, and also I think the story that Brian wanted to tell.

T/F: What were the alternative stories?

DH: There was a trip down to Georgia that turned out to be quite a fiasco, and there was also a whole other angle of Brian’s story involving his background as a competitive bowler.

T/F: Wow.

DH: Yeah, at one point I was thinking I might call the movie Bowling for Jesus.

T/F: How long did you film for?

DH: I spent probably about one and a half years actually filming.

T/F: What’s True/False about your film?

DH: I think there is definitely an aspect of the story where people wonder if these guys are for real. If  they are faking something. And also the question of what aspects of the story are influenced by the filmmaker’s (my) viewpoint and perspectives. Even speculation by viewers of what my own stances and relationship were to the subjects and their world.

T/F: There is one scene in particular that stood out to me. Brian presents a bunch of his rationalizations for the divorce, and then he turns to the camera almost giddy and says “the plot thickens”. It really raised the question of how much of what he was doing was a performance. Was he noticeably different when the camera was off?

DH: You know, he really wasn’t much different when the camera was on or off. But that said, I never saw him in a context where there wasn’t a camera person in the room. Kind of like “I’ll never see myself in the mirror with my eyes closed”. I think there were definitely elements of what Brian gave me that were very much based on the fact that he was having his story recorded “for posterity.”

T/F: One of the most compelling scenes takes place on Rose’s birthday, when he leaves Rose and Kaitlin alone together on the sidewalk in front of the building. It’s hard for me to tell if he is aware how cruel he is being.

DH: A lot of people saw that scene and considered it a “nail in the coffin” on Brian’s likeability. Interestingly, knowing Brian as I did, and knowing in general other asshole people (including sometimes myself), I think Brian was not necessarily trying to be cruel for cruelty’s sake. Rather I think when he asks Rose to prove her birthday and then goads her for being old, he was handling the situation like a lot of people might, if they found themselves in a situation where they are the asshole. Sometimes when you are the jerk, it’s hard not to continue being a jerk and sometimes even exacerbate the situation just to pretend there’s nothing wrong. You know what I mean?

Incidentally, on the issue of forgetting Rose’s birthday, I personally always forget everyone’s birthday, including my own wife. Fortunately she does the same for me, so we are straight . . .

T/F: Ha, yeah, there a lot of times where he does something cruel, and then sort of quickly constructs a theological rationale for his behavior. But he seems like he believes his own crap.

DH: I would definitely say that is one of the biggest neuroses of Brian and people of his personality type; they actually believe everything that comes out of their own mouth. It’s how they get other people to buy it too.

T/F: My understanding is that you composed the score for the film? How did you approach that?

DH: As a matter of fact, the piano piece that bookends the film was one of the first parts that came to me. I was actually in Chinatown watching a funeral procession the day that I decided to turn the project from a photo essay into a documentary. I heard the song in my head. Throughout the rest of the film, the musical elements are much more sparse. I added those parts after I had mostly solidified the edit.

T/F: It creates a beautiful melancholy tone.

DH: Thanks. I actually added a lot of sound elements to the story that were intended to sound as though they were actual ambient sound, but are timed to add color and texture to the story.

T/F: Interesting.

DH: For instance, in the scene where Brian wakes up in the hospital, I added the sound of birds chirping to give the feeling of Brian’s carefree attitude. I also added sounds of banging and clanging in the subways, like the subways were commenting on what was happening.

T/F: Have you talked to Brian, Shawn, Rose or Kaitlin since you finished the film?

DH: I have. Actually, I see Shawn somewhat regularly in the subways as he has taken to regularly setting up at Atlantic/Pacific station in Brooklyn, which is right along my regular commute. Rose I hear from every so often. Brian went to Florida for a while after the film was finished and apparently has recently returned to town, though I haven’t heard from him much, though I have seen him a couple times. Kaitlin I have not spoken to since I finished filming.

T/F: Do you know what they think of the film?

DH: Rose and Shawn both really appreciate the film, from what I understand. Kaitlin I am not really sure since I have not heard from her. I gather it is not something she feels very positive about, especially since she is no longer with Brian. As for Brian, when he first saw the finished cut, he was a bit apprehensive, but then told me that he thought I “didn’t do such a bad job” and that I should “show the film to anyone and everyone”.

T/F: Thanks for taking the time to chat with me. Any thing else you want to add?

DH: One of my favorite quotes is one from Alfred Hitchcock which goes something like “in narrative films, the director is god; in documentary films, god is the director.” I am not religious, nor do I have any real place from which to really comment on anything of a theological nature. But the quote from Hitchcock very much describes the process by which this film came into being. I just showed up each day and hung out waiting for something to happen, never telling anyone to do anything for me, not even moving to where the light was better, or even to wear a mic. In a sense, I don’t feel like I directed this film at all. But in the end, the film that resulted was uncannily close to the film I envisioned that day in Chinatown watching the funeral procession, and I don’t believe that to be a coincidence.

Posted June 12, 2013
 
 
 
   
©2014 True/False Film Fest Columbia, MO 65201 USA 573-442-TRUE