...So when you look at the companies you were able to secure for the film, do you see any sort of pattern, some common motivation that might have led them to take a chance and sign on?
Well, I think some of them are companies that... Like POM, the above-the-title sponsor, is a company that's trying to really gain market share and notoriety, and so the money for them, it was worth the risk. Because ultimately all the companies had to give up control; they didn't get control of the picture, they didn't get final control of the movie. They didn't get to sign off on how they were actually integrated within the film. We had a conversation where we talked about it, but none of them got to see or sign off on that until they actually saw the movie at Sundance. So it was an incredible amount of faith that they had to have, to be willing to take a chance and relinquish some control, which I think, ultimately, is what made the film work.
Honestly, after having seen the film, I feel like the companies who chose to become sponsors really came out looking rather savvy for it.
I completely agree. They look very smart as a result.
What's been the reaction from your sponsors after they saw the completed film?
It's all been positive....
If there could ever be such a thing as a "method filmmaker," I feel like the title would fit you nicely, what with the way you immerse yourself in your experiments. While most documentary filmmakers are content to let their subjects do the talking, you take a more hands-on approach. Do you feel this gives you an advantage in telling a more compelling story?
I think it gives me the ability to tell a much more honest story, because I feel like... You know, you're going on a vicarious journey with me, so as I feel something, you feel something, and as I learn something, you learn something. It literally becomes emotion and education by proxy, where we're in this together, and that's what I hope the films kind of feel like. Read More
No comments:
Post a Comment