Su-City Pictures East, LLC

Screenplay & Film Consulting By Susan Kouguell

Category: SCRIPT MAGAZINE ARTICLES (page 3 of 13)

Susan’s Script Magazine Interview: ‘All Quiet on the Western Front’ Writer and Executive Producer Lesley Paterson On Adaptation, Collaboration and Perseverance

Lesley Paterson, along with her co-writers Ian Stokell and director Edward Berger are nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay and Best International Feature Film. She is also an executive producer of the film.

Many writers and filmmakers often say that getting a movie made is like running a marathon. For screenwriter and producer, Lesley Paterson, this hits close to home; she is a world-champion triathlete.

Lesley and I spoke two weeks after All Quiet on the Western Front swept the BAFTA awards, winning seven, including best film, director and adapted screenplay — more than any other non-English-language film in BAFTA history – and less than two weeks before the Oscars. Lesley, along with her co-writers Ian Stokell and director Edward Berger are nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay and Best International Feature Film. She is also an executive producer of the film.

This is the first time Erich Maria Remarque’s antiwar classic novel has been adapted for the screen in its original German. The story follows teenager Paul Bäumer as he enters the army as an enthusiastic recruit and quickly becomes disillusioned by the horrors of the brutal, futile fighting he encounters. Soldiers such as he are expendable pawns to officers safe from the battlefield and who demand the fighting continue even as armistice is only hours away.

Felix Kammerer as Paul Bäumer in All Quiet on the Western Front. Courtesy Netflix/Photo by Reiner Bajo.
Felix Kammerer as Paul Bäumer in All Quiet on the Western Front. Courtesy Netflix/Photo by Reiner Bajo.

KOUGUELL: You and Ian Stokell first optioned the book in 2006. I understand that you used your race winnings to keep the project afloat over the years, even mortgaging your house at one point to hold onto the rights.

PATERSON: Yes. It ended up being 16 years and two months until we premiered it.

KOUGUELL: The book has been adapted twice prior into movies. Why did you feel the need to do another adaptation?

PATERSON: I read the novel when I was in school. For me, it was the dramatic essence of the betrayal of the youthful generation and it hit a chord. Being from Scotland and that underdog mentality, fighting against the upper brass. I connected to that. When I read it again in 2006, I had gone through an undergraduate in drama, and then a master’s degree in theater and film, and I met Ian at that point, and we were doing various pieces together and we directed some scripts. We were in a bookstore together when we saw the novel on sale and we looked at each other, and thought, there’s not been a film made for several years. (Ian was in the British Army in the 1970s, including a deployment in Northern Ireland and the military, his grandfather fought in the war.)

Lesley Paterson
Lesley Paterson

After reading the novel, we had some ideas about how we would want to do it and then we went about to see if anyone had the rights. We’re kind of mavericks in that regard, and you’ll gather that by my athletic career, we thought we’re on the outside, but let’s have it a go. Lo and behold, no one had the rights. It was shocking. Normally studios or producers had rights, and we pitched them and we were lucky enough that they said yes, and my husband and I scrounged together enough money to pay for the option rights.

For us we felt that we could bring something new to this story; it was the historical context because they didn’t delve into that in previous films, which were more direct translations of the novel. We thought it was fascinating because it was not something we learned in our history, especially coming from the winning side, and so we thought we had something different to offer, and then we embarked on adapting it.

KOUGUELL: How did your adaptation process begin?

PATERSON: We bought multiple copies of the novel and delved into it. We tore it apart, put different scenes on the wall, dug into the thematic essence of what the author was trying to say – that was our guiding light. We did a lot of research all around WWI, from the German side, the French side and British side – the whole landscape of the war, that formed basically how we did the adaptation. Then of course we did multiple drafts, there were completely different stories.

We created a dramatic throughline that could carry the narrative with some urgency that the novel does not have because the novel is almost like excerpts of a diary.

KOUGUELL: You mentioned that rather than a literal translation of the book, it’s an emotional translation. Please expand upon that.

PATERSON: When you look at a novel it’s very difficult to see how you can make it cinematic for an audience. We had to drill down into it, looking at the key elements and thematic premises of the book. For Ed, myself, and Ian, it was telling it from the German perspective, and having that sensibility; there are no heroes, war is not an adventure. We wanted the audience to feel that total devastation, feel the arc of that patriotic fervor to the numbness and animalistic tendencies at the end.

KOUGUELL: How did your collaboration process evolve?

PATERSON: When we first optioned the novel it would have been nearly impossible to get this project off the ground because you could not raise the financing for foreign language films. That’s why we initially decided to do it in English with German accents. Furthermore, WWI was not a hot topic to cover; it was not an American war. Cinema was very much about America back then. As the landscape changed, streamers came in, local language was much more regarded, such as Parasite won best picture and foreign film.

Luckily we held on to the option long enough that eventually producer Malte Grunert got the script and he was doing a project with Ed Berger. And they both said, this needs to be told in the German language. We loved Ed’s vision and we thought it was brilliant. We knew this was the right path, given we just spent 14 years with various producers, directors, and money on and money off.

We did a couple of passes on the script together and then Ed, and rightly so, said I need to do my own pass on the script and I need to infuse it with that German sensibility. That was a wonderful learning curve for us as writers; I think Ian and I brought the outside in perspective which gave it that historical context and something unique. But then Ed came on, and gave it that inside-out perspective; the way Germans talk, the way they interact, that sense of shame, and their culture about previous wars.

Ed did his pass on the script in English, then gave it to us, and we had some collaboration on that, and that was translated into German. Because Ed is a co-writer and director, it was somewhat seamless. We are also executive producers on the project, and you put your producer’s hat on and say, if you trust in this director, let him do what they need to do to bring it to the screen.

[Filmmaker Chloé Zhao and Producer Spears Talk Adapting “Nomadland” to the Screen at the New York Film Festival]

KOUGUELL: It’s certainly a timely film given all that is happening today.

PATERSON: It’s as relevant today as it was then. As the years rolled on, interestingly, that’s what makes this novel so powerful is the essence of it; the everyman, the betrayal of a youthful generation, the destruction of war, the senseless killings.

KOUGUELL: What tips do you have for writers working on adaptations?

PATERSON: If you are adapting on a basic level, first make sure you have the rights and a good lawyer with the right contacts. Second, read it multiple times, get the essence of it. Adaptation doesn’t mean it needs to be a lesser translation, it’s not a documentary. View it through your own lens and your own experience. Be streamlined with what you want to say; if you say too many things it becomes about nothing. Finding that throughline and finding your angle is really your key.

Continue to go back to the novel. It’s also important to put it down and go back to it. Another key is research, this will spawn more ideas. Don’t do research just for a historical piece there are so many things that can spawn ideas.

KOUGUELL: What has this experience of bringing this film to life brought to you?

AAAABXr1kA6H-bicm_NLHEAxN5_KsSgUS7qEVtgcwJnzOtULjlK8PosoKnxcL4PM8bFfc_HSENKrPAwrLGKgII6tAidJOaTVuzz56T8vw2LM7i274mu6IqPGIzlLrsLWynvZX5TVUw

PATERSON: It’s given me confidence to follow my dreams and to never give up when people are saying no. You must keep going and stay true to your why; Why is this story important for you to tell? If you can drill down on that, then it’s going to give you the passion to keep going.

All Quiet on the Western Front is now streaming on Netflix.

Susan’s Interview with Trailblazing Filmmaker Nina Menkes About Her New Documentary ‘Brainwashed: Sex-Camera-Power’

Filmmaker Nina Menkes discusses her thought-provoking and illuminating documentary ‘Brainwashed: Sex- Camera-Power,’ which explores the sexual politics of cinematic shot design, showing how this visual language of cinema connects to both severe employment discrimination against women – especially in the film industry – as well as to the epidemic of sexual harassment and abuse that was exposed through the #MeToo movement.

Still from Brainwashed: Sex-Camera-Power. Photo courtesy BrainwashedMovie LLC.
Still from Brainwashed: Sex-Camera-Power. Photo courtesy BrainwashedMovie LLC.

Considered a cinematic feminist pioneer and one of America’s foremost independent filmmakers, Nina Menkes has shown widely in major international film festivals and museums. Honors include a Los Angeles Film Critics Association Award, a Guggenheim Fellowship, two fellowships from the National Endowment for the Arts, an AFI Independent Filmmaker Award, a Creative Capital Award and an International Critics Award (FIPRESCI Prize).Menkes holds an MFA in Film Production from UCLA , is a directing member of The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and is a member of the faculty at California Institute of the Arts.

In our wide-ranging and eye-opening conversation over Zoom, Menkes and I discussed her thought-provoking and illuminating documentary Brainwashed: Sex- Camera-Power, which explores the sexual politics of cinematic shot design, showing how this visual language of cinema connects to both severe employment discrimination against women – especially in the film industry – as well as to the epidemic of sexual harassment and abuse that was exposed through the #MeToo movement.

Nina Menkes. Portrait by Ann Johansson.
Nina Menkes. Portrait by Ann Johansson.

This social issue documentary uses over 200 film clips from 1896 through the present and includes 23 interviews with women and non-binary industry professionals, including Julie Dash, Penelope Spheeris, Charlyne Yi, Joey Soloway, Catherine Hardwicke, Eliza Hittman, Rosanna Arquette, and Laura Mulvey.

This must-see film should be included in the curriculum for all filmmaking, screenwriting, and cinema studies students.

KOUGUELL: Let’s start with your personal background. Your mother’s parents were German Jews who fled Hitler’s genocide, settling in Jerusalem in 1933 and your father’s Austrian Jewish family perished in the concentration camps. This type of trauma, particularly for you as a first-generation American, forever remains. How does your specific background of family trauma and the violence of objectification inform your work?

MENKES: I’m so glad that you brought this up, no one else has brought it up. I happen to think it’s really key. My mother was a baby in 1933, and her parents got out of Berlin and she was raised in Jerusalem. My father’s whole family were all gassed to death. My father was taken as a child, in a secret rescue to Jerusalem in 1940. My parents got married there and later immigrated to the United States.

This experience obviously impacted my family. The fact is that they [researchers] found that trauma is transmitted via DNA, I grew up with the idea that systems of power can be corrupt, and systems of power that are supported by the majority does not mean they are right.

I grew up in a household that rejected the idea that popularity is a sign of moral greatness on a very deep level. A second important point to this, the Jews before they were murdered in the Holocaust, were objectified by the Nazis. You cannot treat another person in the way that the Jews were treated in the concentration camps if you think of them as full-on human subjects. You have to denigrate them in your own mind before you can even do these actions; this has all been extensively documented.

I’m not trying to make an equivalency between what happened in the concentration camps and sexist representation in film, there’s a big gap there. There is a certain level of intersection with the idea that objectification is not a beautiful thing, and objectification is tied to violence. Extensive research has shown that women who either consume objectifying media or self-objectify as it’s done on Instagram, every minute of the day, has been correlated to body dysmorphia, eating disorders, and higher levels of shame than those who don’t do it, and a higher acceptance of sexual harassment, and even sexual assault. This whole thing of objectification is not just fun and games.

KOUGUELL: Brainwashed stemmed from your lecture presentation “Sex and Power: The Visual Language of Oppression” which was at Sundance’s Black House in January 2018, for the launch of Gwen Wynne’s Eos World Fund. Tell me more about this and how it turned into this film.

MENKES: There are a lot of differences between the two. The lecture had 10 film clips and this film has 200, and millions of other differences. The idea was, how can we bring some of these concepts that some people in the PhD film theory world discuss, to film watchers who are not exposed to those ideas?

For those people who know my other work, it tends to be slightly towards the art film and avant-garde film direction. I certainly never thought about the audience when I made my own feature films. This documentary was about how can we prove our case and have the film be fascinating and interesting for sophisticated filmgoers, as well as some person who is not focusing on film as a profession, but a film watcher, which is kind of everybody.

That was challenging, and based on reactions, some people seem to love it. We’ve shown it in all the major film festivals and have gotten some amazing reviews, and we’ve also been attacked, and interestingly we’ve mainly been attacked by other women. People are very invested in their feelings about cinematic masterpieces.

KOUGUELL: Would you say that this lecture served as your script and/or outline for this documentary?

MENKES: The lecture is the core thing that we jumped off of but making the film I worked closely with the editor and creative producer, Cecily Rhett. In fact, I’ve been telling imdb.com to take my name down as writer. I don’t really claim to be the writer, but in a documentary film, the editor is in many ways the writer of the film. I was there for every second of the journey and participated in the decisions. There was no bona fide script as with most documentaries. Cecily had an amazing program called Dynalist, which we used to organize and structure our ideas. It was very collaborative.

Nina Menkes and Rita Hayworth. Photo courtesy BrainwashedMovie LLC.
Nina Menkes and Rita Hayworth. Photo courtesy BrainwashedMovie LLC.

KOUGUELL: In your own experimental narrative films, you worked with a small crew. How did that change, if at all, when working on this documentary?

MENKES: It seems like a bigger crew when you look at the credits, but each shoot didn’t have that many people. The overall project was more elaborative, in terms of making my narrative films, which I write, produce, edit, and direct.

This film was more complicated on so many levels. Regarding editing, I needed a pro editor who understood the deep issues that I am laying down here and knows me and my work and has background in commercial narrative and documentary film. I was lucky to get Cecily Rhett who had all those qualifications, I’ve known her for a long time, it was a very collaborative process.

There were a lot of people involved in the film research, and then there was the legal part, you have to clear every single clip through attorneys. There was a lot of attorney interaction and the attorney actually influenced a lot of our decisions, because he would say, ‘This clip won’t fly for fair use, you have to find another clip.’ Or he would say, ‘You need to include voice over because it won’t fly for fair use.’

The postproduction was complex, with all these film clips. There was no time code; every single picture and sound was hand matched by Jim Rosenthal, our brilliant postproduction producer.

With the score, I never worked with a composer before. It was challenging for me because I always did the sound myself on my films. Composer Sharon Farber did a genius job.

All those things made it a bigger production. A lot of the interviews were over Zoom because we were in the middle of the pandemic. For example, it was me on Zoom and a team in Atlanta when we interviewed Julie Dash.

Kouguell: How did these films that you include in your documentary, such as Orlando, LeBonheurDaughters of the Dust, and so on inform your own work?

Menkes: I was more reassured by seeing [Agnès Varda’s] Vagabond and [Chantal Akerman’s] Jeanne Dielman (which Menkes didn’t see until after making her film Magdalena Viraga) that there was someone else out there in the world who had similar feelings.

Kouguell: During production, the Brainwashed team reached out to representatives of almost all the living directors whose work is included in the movie, including Sofia Coppola, Martin Scorsese, Ridley Scott, Spike Lee, Quentin Tarantino, and Denis Villeneuve among many others, to invite them for on-camera interviews. They declined the opportunity to participate.

Since the completion of this film have you heard from any of them?

MENKES: No not yet – the film is coming out on Friday.

thin black line

The film will open in New York City at DCTV downtown and in Los Angeles at the Laemmle Theaters Friday October 21st with a national rollout to follow.

Trailer

Learn more about the film and rescources here.

Susan’s interview with Camera D’Or Cannes Film Festival Winner, ‘Murina’ Writer and Director Antoneta Alamat Kusijanovic

My interview with Camera D’Or Cannes Film Festival Winner, ‘Murina’ Writer and Director Antoneta Alamat Kusijanovic

Gracija Filipovic in MURINA. Photo courtesy Kino Lorber.
Gracija Filipovic in MURINA. Photo courtesy Kino Lorber.

Kusijanovic generously shared her passion for telling the truth about characters and conveying cloaked violence in her film Murina. During our wide-ranging talk we delved into the themes of human nature and the physical and dangerous beauty of nature of water and the land, in conflict with the chauvinism, power, and a teen finding agency.

Julija is like the murina, the moral eel, an animal that will bite its own flesh to break herself free.  Kusijanovic

About Murina: Tensions rise between restless teenager Julija and her oppressive father, Ante, when an old family friend arrives at their Croatian island home. As Ante attempts to broker a life-changing deal, their tranquil yet isolated existence leaves Julija wanting more from this influential visitor, who provides a taste of liberation over a weekend laid bare to desire and violence.

Executive produced by Martin Scorsese, award-winning cinematographer Hélène Louvart (The Lost DaughterNever Rarely Sometimes Always, and Agnes Varda’s The Beaches of Agnes).

Kouguell: Let’s start by talking about how your short film Into the Blue evolved into Murina. As you mentioned, the feature is not an expanded version of the short. Please elaborate.

Kusijanovic: It’s the same actress and the same character’s name. I wrote the feature months after the short premiered. It came from my feeling that the actress was entering this very sensitive moment in her life and confronting that mentality we both grew up in; it’s a delicate moment of noticing changes both emotionally and physically. I had an opportunity to capture it forever.

Antoneta Alamat Kusijanovic. ©Maja Medic.
Antoneta Alamat Kusijanovic. ©Maja Medic.

Kouguell: You co-wrote the script with Frank Graziano. Tell me about that.

Kusijanovic: We met at Columbia University. We decided to join forces. I had already written one-to-two drafts of the script. Frank brought the male perspective; the ‘second half of the brain’ to the movie. He’s a really great collaborator.

Kouguell: One of the most compelling story aspects was the ever-shifting triangulated relationships between your main characters.

Kusijanovic: It was an interesting process writing these characters. They are real people, they are toned down for the screen, In reality, in Croatia and in many countries, sometimes the reality is too harsh for the screen and I did have to make it more accessible, something not so repulsive to have you stop watching the film.

Ante, the father in Murina is 45. It is the age, where many men feel they haven’t accomplished something; they feel it’s never going to happen again and that’s what defines their life and why a lot of problems surface at that time. Ante, having a friend, Javier, who is such a powerful man next to you, to mirror your success, is a complicated dynamic between the father and Javier. And then having a woman who could still choose between any of them. From one side she has a dilemma – one man is seemingly free of his demons and on the other side is the man she created life with. To be the daughter, Julija, in that triangle of the three lovers; she can see everyone’s weakness — they’re all grown up kids, very harmed; they move by ego, guilt, and remorse.

[Interview with ‘The Power of the Dog’ Editor Peter Sciberras]

Kouguell: Without revealing any spoilers, and in simple terms, Julija seeks independence in order to survive.

Kusijanovic: Julija has to grow up very fast; certain things she assumes and very easily jumps to conclusions of what she sees and thinks she understands and certain things she needs experience to understand. It’s complex because her mother and father do have their reasons why they became this way.

It was very fun to write it. We had to build these four characters equally strong and equally damaged and equally troubled with strong desires and tormented between many possible choices.

Kouguell: The cinematography was incredible, particularly the underwater photography. Tell me about your collaboration with cinematographer Hélène Louvart.

Kusijanovic: Hélène’s amazing. She makes very complicated things very simple, and that’s her strength. She comes from the mountain and I come from the sea. We had very opposite and very compatible views of this world. She is very interested in human behavior and motivation.

We first started with characters, then the space, then the emotional and the oral rhythms, then came the light and shots, and the rest.

We wanted the characters to feel isolated, claustrophobic, tormented – even when they are in wide spaces. Even in the wide shots they feel even more locked in. Under the sun, there is no shade, nowhere to hide. Even in the apartment and on the rocks, this feeling had to happen. They were like raw meat simmering in the sun.

Danica Curcic, Gracija Filipovic, Leon Lucev in MURINA. Photo courtesy Kino Lorber.
Danica Curcic, Gracija Filipovic, Leon Lucev in MURINA. Photo courtesy Kino Lorber.

Kouguell: The emotions and rawness escalated in each scene.

Kusijanovic: There’s a level of agitation. The postcard settings are a context that even in these beautiful sunny places, violence happens. I don’t like to reserve the violence for the hidden dark alleys. Violence happens in the open, among many people and outside in the sun, at a holiday location, the beach.

Kouguell: Like the party confrontation in front of the guests.

Kusijanovic: Yes. Everywhere. The violence is always cloaked — into fun, into a so-called mentality. It’s not ‘mentality’ it’s f-ing violence and it’s something that a lot of cultures like to hide behind it.

Kouguell: Into the Blue garnered a great deal of attention at the Berlin Film Festival and led to Martin Scorsese coming on board as Executive Producer.

Kusijanovic: They trusted in me, and it was a great experience. It was nice to get a call from Martin Scorsese and get his notes.

[Interview with ‘tick, tick…BOOM!’ Screenwriter Steven Levenson]

Kouguell: My students, particularly my female-identifying students, always ask how they can break into the industry and get their work seen.

Kusijanovic: There is only one way. Write an amazing story, no one can refuse a good story. No one. There’s no way the story is so good that it can be refused. Now is the time. People are aware more than ever that films directed by women are getting financed. Women don’t need quotas; we just need to get financed. I hope in a couple of years we don’t need to use the terminology “female films” or “female directors”. There are “films” and there are “directors”. Thank you for the question.

MURINA will open theatrically on Friday, July 8th at the Metrograph in New York, and on Friday, July 15th at Laemmle Theaters in Los Angeles with national rollout to follow.

Interview with THE POWER OF THE DOG Editor Peter Sciberras

Script contributor Susan Kouguell interviews Australian film editor Peter Sciberras about carefully sustaining and building tension throughout the film, while still highlighting the complexity and surprises built into the characters and the story.

SUSAN KOUGUELL

JAN 26, 2022

THE POWER OF THE DOG BENEDICT CUMBERBATCH as PHIL BURBANK in THE POWER OF THE DOG. Cr. KIRSTY GRIFFIN/NETFLIX © 2021 Cross City Films Limited/Courtesy of Netflix.
THE POWER OF THE DOG BENEDICT CUMBERBATCH as PHIL BURBANK in THE POWER OF THE DOG. Cr. KIRSTY GRIFFIN/NETFLIX © 2021 Cross City Films Limited/Courtesy of Netflix.

The multi-award-winning The Power of the Dog now playing on Netflix, centers on charismatic rancher Phil Burbank who inspires fear and awe in those around him. When his brother brings home a new wife and her son, Phil torments them until he finds himself exposed to the possibility of love.

In my interview with Australian film editor Peter Sciberras we talked about carefully sustaining and building tension throughout the film, while still highlighting the complexity and surprises built into the characters and the story.

Peter Sciberras’s feature film debut HAIL (dir. Amiel Courtin-Wilson) was selected to play in competition at the 2011 Venice International Film Festival. That same year, the short film MEATHEAD (dir. Sam Holst) gained selection in the Cannes Film Festival, and was also awarded the Crystal Bear for Best Short Film at the Berlin International Film Festival. Peter’s feature film collaboration with David Michôd has spanned three films: THE ROVER, which premiered at Cannes Film Festival in 2014; WAR MACHINE, starring Brad Pitt, which premiered on Netflix in 2017 and THE KING, which premiered at Venice International Film Festival and was nominated for best editing at the Australian Academy of Cinema and Television in 2019.

Peter Sciberras
Peter Sciberras

KOUGUELL: Tell me about your collaboration with Campion.

SCIBERRAS: I never met Jane before this film. Jane likes to be in the editing room, which I like too. I like to be with directors as much as possible, to get a sense of their particular vision and the atmosphere they invoke. Watching the dailies with Jane, I was soaking in as much as possible — what she liked and what wasn’t there for her. It’s interesting finding how your perspective aligns with the director and making the film they want to make as opposed to what you thought they wanted to make.

That’s the beauty of being in the room together; when you have one idea, and it builds from there in a constant stream of thought. It was such a pleasure to work with someone who is so confident with their vision. And it was incredibly fun.

KOUGUELL: When you signed onto the project had you read the original novel by Thomas Savage?

SCIBERRAS: I had never heard of the novel. I make a point not to know the source material prior to editing, so as not to fill in ideas from the source material. I know what Jane added and her memory of the book and her version of the script.

[Interview with ‘tick, tick…BOOM!’ Screenwriter Steven Levenson]

KOUGUELL: You mentioned solving some of the challenges in the script and changes that were made from the script to the film.

SCIBERRAS: Some characters were introduced quite late and then they disappear for half the script. There was a lot of balancing and identifying how to bring them in and then deciding how much we can get away with. For example, with Phil he’s not in it for a long time and the challenge was keeping that tension building without losing Phil’s presence.

KOUGUELL: The scenes of the vast landscape with the cowboys reminded me, in terms of the tension and atmosphere, of Campion’s film SWEETIE specifically with the landscapes in the outback and the (Australian) cowboys – the jackaroos – dancing.

SCIBERRAS: Jane feels landscape in a particular way; when it comes to filmmaking, she’s very attuned to landscape and very aware of the atmosphere that’s evoked.

With the long panning shot over the hill, we wanted something that had a certain atmosphere and it had a beauty and sensuality with the shapes and shadows hidden in the landscape. Having those conversations with Jane I was very aware of how she sees the world, and how those things permeate every scene, and how attune she is to nature.

KOUGUELL: The tension between Peter and Phil is palpable and continues to escalate as the film unfolds. Let’s talk about that cigarette scene.

SCIBERRAS: The intimate sharing of the rolled cigarette between Peter – who rolls it ‘to be like’ Phil, Kodi (Peter’s character) was so terrific there; the boy’s taken over and the boy is commanding this scene.

KOUGUELL: It was a shift of power between the two characters.

SCIBERRAS: Yes. And cutting to the horses with Peter; the horses had witnessed something we (the audience) hadn’t seen. It was a moment to get a bit more abstract and lyrical and hopefully transport the audience and give the moment some space to live.

[INTERVIEW: ‘Son of the South’ Writer/Director Barry Alexander Brown]

KOUGUELL: The film’s pacing has a distinct rhythm.

SCIBERRAS: As an editor watching dailies and watching performances, you feel the pace the director was working at. It felt really clear to me. The film wanted to be really patient, and I felt that Jane set that up with Ari Wegner the DP. A lot of the pace comes from that, and hopefully the elegance and simplicity.

Weirdly when watching it, I was thinking of Hitchcock; that clear communication of framing, maybe there is something of that. Jane never mentioned that psychological reference with Hitchcock.

KOUGUELL: The film is broken into five chapters. The chapter cards were not in the script.

SCIBERRAS: Right. The chapters were not there to begin with. It was a big part of the edit. With the addition of the chapters, you were left with a question and a cliffhanger moment. In the script it was a fade to black. The chapters allowed us to leave you with a moment of anticipation. It was an interesting shift in the way the film moved, and it allowed us to cut it shorter as opposed to a soft transition.

KOUGUELL: Let’s talk about building tension and intimacy in scenes, and the importance of not being mysterious just to be mysterious in the scenes with Peter and Phil.

SCIBERRAS: All of Peter and Phil’s scenes were fun to cut. Their long lingering looks and a side glance – when you have such great performances it’s exciting. In their scenes, you don’t know what the characters are thinking, and you don’t know where the tension is coming from. Can you trust these people? The ambiguity, tension, and questioning their intentions.

KOUGUELL: Those lingering looks built the tension between these two characters and easily could have been seen as pretentious but it was not.

SCIBERRAS: Jane wants everything to resonate. She has a great compass for that reality, that’s why she can play in that world without it becoming pretentious; it’s very real and raw human. But she has very exciting high concept ideas that she executes and it’s that combination that live in her work and makes her work both accessible and layered. She’s brilliant on that level.

KOUGUELL: Some scenes were omitted and rearranged from the script.

SCIBERRAS: There was a lot of omitting around the start of every chapter.

The first act was tricky, you want to get to the Red Mill quickly where Rose and Peter are introduced, but you need to set up the brothers and how they communicate, and we need to tell backstory. It was a tricky dance to get the right feeling. The brothers have been this way for a really long time and one of them has had enough and he’s not all the way there yet.

The opening of the script opened the same as the book with the castration of the cow. We restructured that scene and put it later when Peter arrives at the ranch. With this cut, it gave it this kind of energy, foreboding and signaling what is going to happen with this boy.

KOUGUELL: The film successfully establishes characters’ relationships and back story without exposition and reveals critical information at just the right moments.

SCIBERRAS: We didn’t want to show too much too quickly. For example, with the magazines in the cubby that are discovered, we wanted the audience to slowly learn what was going on. It felt reductive the way it was originally in the script and we didn’t want the audience to say, that’s why Phil is the way he is.

We also cut the saddle scene. We loved the internal work when Phil’s with his objects of admiration and love, and we wanted to continue that feeling. Jane came up with the idea to have Phil swimming and that was a key restructure, and to have him floating like a crocodile.

KOUGUELL: Advice for our readers?

SCIBERRAS: For editors, understanding the story you’re telling and being free to explore, to create a space with a director to go deep and create a safe place where nothing is off-limits leads to interesting avenues and solutions to problems.

For writers, editors and filmmakers, persistence is everything. It is the key. Good ideas will come but stick to it. Honing intuition is a key thing as well. Allowing yourself to feel the story, and immerse yourself in the characters, understanding the story from the inside and finding the best way to tell it.

The Power of the Dog is now available to watch on Netflix.


Interview with ‘tick, tick…BOOM!’ Screenwriter Steven Levenson

In a wide-ranging discussion, screenwriter Steven Levenson talks about writing and collaborating for the stage, film and television, delving into the creative process, and the challenges of adapting tick, tick…BOOM! – a true story to the screen.

Steven Levenson is a playwright and television writer who authored the Tony Award-winning book, Dear Evan Hansen. His plays include If I Forget, The Unavoidable Disappearance of Tom Durnin, Days of Rage, and The Language of Trees. In television, Levenson co-developed and executive produced the FX limited series Fosse/Verdon and was a writer and producer on Showtime’s Masters of Sex. His honors include the Obie Award, Outer Critics Circle Award, Drama League Award, Helen Hayes Award, and the John Gassner Memorial Playwriting Award.

About tick, tick…BOOM! Pulitzer Prize and Tony Award winner Lin-Manuel Miranda makes his feature directorial debut with tick, tick…BOOM!, an adaptation of the autobiographical musical by Jonathan Larson, who revolutionized theater as the creator of Rent.

Andrew Garfield as Jonathan Larson in tick, tick...BOOM!. Photo courtesy Netflix.
Andrew Garfield as Jonathan Larson in tick, tick…BOOM!. Photo courtesy Netflix.

Kouguell: Let’s start by talking about your career trajectory.

Levenson: I started acting in school plays and musicals, and continued acting through college and loved it, but toward the end of college, I began to feel that as much I loved acting, I wanted to do more than just interpret ideas and words. And then I discovered playwriting. My playwriting professor (Pulitzer prize winner) Paula Vogel was very instrumental in giving me confidence.

When I left school and moved to New York City, I got a job as a literary assistant at Playwrights Horizon and for two years I wrote coverage and kept writing plays. I had plays produced at Roundabout Theatre Company and other underground theaters, and then made my way to Los Angeles and making Dear Evan Hansen.

Kouguell: Working with composers is an important element of your body of work.

Steven Levenson
Steven Levenson

Levenson: I always loved musicals and had a great deal of respect for them. I was eager to work with composers and found the process very intuitive, it felt like a natural fit. It is a very collaborative process and it’s very creative and inspiring how ideas multiply with multiple people.

It takes some humility to work with music in general. If the music in a stage play is great, and after the show when people leave the theater, the book or script will fade into the background if it’s doing its job.

With Tick, Tick…Boom! the challenge there was to take songs that already existed and try to sew the two together. In a way it’s more challenging because you can’t make changes to the songs. It was really a creative and inspirational constraint; as a writer, sometimes constraints are the most freeing things.

The Larson Papers at the Library of Congress

Director Lin-Manuel Miranda, producer Jen Tepper and Levenson viewed the Larson Papers at the Library of Congress, an extensive archive created a few years after Larson’s passing. A treasure trove of the more than 200 songs Larson had written since 1978, the archive contains early versions of numbers from Rent and tick, tick…BOOM!, songs and notes from his musical Superbia, letters, scores, notes, photographs, notebooks, cassettes, demo tapes, and books.

Kouguell: This project was a particularly unique adaptation process; adapting elements from Larson’s personal life as well as his own writing.

Levenson: At the Library of Congress archives we looked at Larson’s papers and spent maybe four or five hours making copies of things. tick, tick…BOOM! began as this solo piece that Jonathan wrote and performed himself, but there were many different drafts of it over several years.

We found every possible draft of tick tick…BOOM! and every draft of Superbia, which was challenging because none of them was carefully labeled or dated. There were five drafts of tick tick…Boom!, our task was to find the commonality and differences and find the most vital and fun material. It was an exciting challenge.

We went back to Larson’s original show, which was about 45 minutes long. Making it into a film, we wanted to do what Jonathan couldn’t do in a solo show, and the great gift of the screen, we could see him create it and see those events and expand them. It was like piecing together a puzzle and getting inside Jonathan’s head as a writer as best we could.

I wanted to put the solo show in and build around it. We would see the story unfold and another frame around that, the present tense viewing of this story and with Susan as the narrator at the opening and end of the film, to get the full impact and understanding of the context of the story, knowing that Larson went on to write a musical (Rent) that changed theater.

Levenson then went on to talk about how they structured the material, listing the songs on a white board and constructing the dialogue around them.

Kouguell: I imagine you felt a strong sense of responsibility to Larson’s life and his work.

Levenson: It was a joyful responsibility. As a team, I think we all pushed harder to make it right, and to always be excellent. There were little things – for example, the scene in Central Park where we are seeing seagulls fly by, the seagulls were Jonathan’s idea. It was freeing as a writer, I was there to serve his vision, and I took my ego out of it.

Kouguell: You write for the stage, as well as for film and television, and worked as a showrunner. In film and television, scripts are considered more of a blueprint from which others work. How do you approach the writing process in each medium?

Levenson: I think plays are about living in real time and in the way conversations really unfold and the rhythms of actual speech and you can luxuriate in that, there’s a different kind of time.

With a script for film and television, the rhythm is about picking the most important moments in a scene and cutting to the meat of it. It’s more about story; plot is a much bigger driver, whereas in a play you can take your time and stretch this. I’m always conscious of that.

For a musical, one line in a song can capture a scene that’s several pages in a script.

Kouguell: Advice for writers?

Levenson: The best creative advice I was given was to take in as much as I could; to read and see as much as I could. If there was a script, I read it to learn how to figure out how it worked. It’s how to find your voice. Immerse yourself in what you love.

Interview with TOGETHER Screenwriter Dennis Kelly

Susan Kouguell interviews Tony®, Emmy® and Olivier Award winner writer Dennis Kelly about his funny, provocative and poignant new film ‘Together’. The film follows one family navigating the challenges faced by people worldwide during a once-in-a-lifetime crisis and finding a way to survive — together.

Dennis Kelly
Dennis Kelly

Dennis Kelly did not set out to write a piece about COVID, but as the pandemic began, he was hearing people around him say things like, “We’re all in this together, isn’t it great? Let’s make videos and make it fun.” However, he thought, what if everyone isn’t in this together? “How much fun can it be if you hate the person that you’re with or you’re losing your job or you’re one of the people who wasn’t able to work from home — the ones that kept society going?”

Directed by Academy Award® nominee Stephen Daldry, Together stars James McAvoy and Sharon Horgan who portray a couple forced to re-evaluate themselves and their relationship through the reality of lockdown.

I had the pleasure to speak with Tony®, Emmy® and Olivier Award winner writer Dennis Kelly about his funny, provocative and poignant new film Together. The film follows one family navigating the challenges faced by people worldwide during a once-in-a-lifetime crisis and finding a way to survive — together.

Dennis Kelly wrote the screenplay for the feature Black Sea and his work for theater includes Debris, Osama the Hero, After the End, Love and Money, Taking Care of Baby, Orphans, The Gods Weep, The Ritual Slaughter of Gorge Mastromas and Girls and Boys. His television credits include creating and writing UtopiaPulling, and The Third Day. Kelly also wrote the book for the Olivier-and Tony-winning Matilda the Musical.

This interview has been edited for content and clarity.

KOUGUELL: Let’s start with the hot button topic of taking on the challenge of writing about COVID and this specific time period.

KELLY: I’ve never written about anything so immediate — and it’s still going on. I didn’t want to write about COVID, it just happened. I was busy during lockdown; I was lucky to have work all the way through this time. One night my partner and I watched the news together and I was stunned by the idiocy I saw, and fueled by the anger I wanted to write about two people who felt very different about what was going on, and questioned what if you didn’t like the people you were with during lockdown.

[Interview with ‘Esther in Wonderland’ Filmmaker Stephanie Bollag]

KOUGUELL: Together was shot in ten days after ten days of rehearsal. Were you present?

KELLY: Yes, all the way through. Daldry wanted me there. He was extraordinary. He guides you through with brilliant ideas and he has lots of experience and is not threatened by suggestions. It became a collaborative process.

KOUGUELL: There are only seven scenes in the film, which gives the film a layer of intimacy and tension.

KELLY: Originally there were just five or six scenes. There was a different kind of ending before.

James McAvoy (left) and Sharon Horgan (right) star in Stephen Daldry's TOGETHER, a Bleecker Street release Credit: Peter Mountain
James McAvoy (left) and Sharon Horgan (right) star in Stephen Daldry’s TOGETHER, a Bleecker Street release Credit: Peter Mountain

Kelly went on to talk about adding and cutting scenes, and we agreed that this was a great example of the adage of the heartbreak of “killing your darlings”.

KELLY: This was definitely a challenge in this film especially when actors give beautiful performances. One must think about the whole of the piece.

KOUGUELL: Your two main characters break the fourth wall.

KELLY: I write for television, theater and film, and throughout my career, my advice is, never think that you have three jobs divided by three, they’re all different disciplines. And then I broke that rule. This script is definitely influenced by playwriting.

What we were doing was different, than for example The Office. In Together they were talking directly to the audience.

KOUGUELL: Often that device can take the viewer out of a movie, but not in this case.

KELLY: We didn’t know if it worked at first but then you look at Sharon when she has a direct to camera speech and you really experience what she’s feeling as this woman.

KOUGUELL: The characters are known as “He” and “She”. Why no names?

KELLY: I’m terrible with names. In my first plays, I had students and people writing about my work come up to me and say things like, ‘Why are there so many characters named Louise?’ With my play Girls and Boys, I refused to give the characters names, because human beings are constantly accessing others, and there is that internal process when someone hears a person’s name, they immediately label them.

[The Making of an Icon ‘Lady Boss: The Jackie Collins Story’]

KOUGUELL: Without the names, the viewer can impose their own story onto these characters.

Together_Poster_2764x4096

KELLY: Yes. And He and She are such different characters; He is a staunch conservative and She is more of a liberal. He calls She a socialist.

KOUGUELL: We don’t see He and She interact with their son very often, which is an interesting choice.

KELLY: Originally, the boy wasn’t in the script. Daldry wanted him moving around in the background, and I really liked how he did that and the boy he cast was wonderful. At the end of the film, after a while you get a sense of their son when he’s on the trampoline. I was thinking about my daughter who at the time was two-years old. I was thinking about all the kids during this time. There’s so much we all had to process during lockdown. 

Susan’s Interview: ‘Cherry’ Screenwriter Jessica Goldberg

Susan Kouguell speaks with screenwriter Jessica Goldberg about her work as a playwright, and the process of collaborating and adapting her new film ‘Cherry’ from the book to the screen.

SUSAN KOUGUELL

I had the pleasure to speak with screenwriter Jessica Goldberg about her work as a playwright, and the process of collaborating and adapting her new film Cherry from the book to the screen.

CHERRY, directed by Joe and Anthony Russo, follows the wild journey of a disenfranchised young man from Ohio who meets the love of his life, only to risk losing her through a series of bad decisions and challenging life circumstances. Inspired by the best-selling novel of the same name, Cherry features Tom Holland in the title role as an unhinged character who drifts from dropping out of college to serving in Iraq as an Army medic and is only anchored by his one true love, Emily (Ciara Bravo). When Cherry returns home a war hero, he battles the demons of undiagnosed PTSD and spirals into drug addiction, surrounding himself with a menagerie of depraved misfits. Draining his finances, Cherry turns to bank robbing to fund his addiction, shattering his relationship with Emily along the way.

Jessica Goldberg
Jessica Goldberg

About Jessica Goldberg

Award-winning playwright, screenwriter and executive producer Jessica Goldberg previously served as the showrunner and executive producer on Netflix’s AWAY which starred Hilary Swank and Josh Charles. In 2016, Jessica created and executive produced the critically-acclaimed Hulu series, THE PATH, starring Aaron Paul, Michelle Monaghan and Hugh Dancy, which ran for three seasons. Prior to that, she served as a writer and producer on the NBC drama, PARENTHOOD.

Susan Kouguell: How does your background as a playwright inform your work as a screenwriter?

Jessica Goldberg: There’s a lot of characterdepth you must have as a playwright. Of course there were so many things I had to learn from theatre, to television, to film about structure and plot. Plays tend to be more character-driven. This movie actually worked well for my early skills since it’s quite a character-driven movie. As a playwright it’s really about dialogue; I used to hear voices always talking in my head, and film is more visual. Often you need more story drive, but there is so much overlap as the depth of the human experience that you try to mine as a playwright, and that’s what you want to do in any form of writing.

KouguellYou are the co-writer along with Angela Russo-Otstot, the sister of the directors Joe and Anthony Russo. Talk about this collaboration.

Goldberg: I met the Russos about a year or two prior on another adaptation of a book that I was adapting for the screen. Angela produces for them, and we worked very closely on that project so she and I developed this language together, which you need when you collaborate on a screenplay.

The book was very personal to the Russos. It takes place in Cleveland where they grew up; it’s about people they know and the opioid crisis in Cleveland. They asked me to come on board with Angela to work on the screenplay and it was amazing because we already had a strong collaborative language but I didn’t have Cleveland. The first thing we did was get on a plane and go to Cleveland. We walked the walk of the book it was based on. The main character is a bank robber, and we walked to all the banks, we saw how he escaped, we really got a feeling of the town, the city, and we talked to a lot of young people who came of age at that same time our main character was coming of age. Through that process of walking through her hometown and discussing the story over dinner, in the car, over breakfast, and so on, you really start to develop a way of working together.

Cherry, AppleTV+
Cherry, AppleTV+

KouguellTell me about the adaptation process from Nico Walker’s autobiographical novel to the screen.

Goldberg: It was quite a difficult adaptation. The book goes over 18 years and it’s a series of stories, little vignettes that move forward through his life. He starts as a young man, then he goes to Iraq, comes back and gets addicted. Traveling in that book is the character of Emily but she wasn’t as much a part of the book. When we started to decide how are we really going to invest in this guy and the story, we thought maybe we can pull out more of a love story here. That’s something we added to the structure in the film; it became the frame of the film to have a person who we invested in deeply through this story. That was an addition.

Also, Nico wanted the book to be seen as a work of fiction. He was in prison when they acquired his book. We found a little bit of liberty in our adaptation, translating it from the book to the screen, which was obviously a totally different form.

KouguellIn the film, the main character breaks the fourth wall. Let’s talk about the decision to include this device.

GoldbergOne of the big challenges of adapting the book was that his voice is so lyrical and poetic; he has such a unique way of looking at the world. So the challenge was, how do you capture a voice that is that unique? Really early on the Russo brothers said, “Try everything, just go and have a great time, let’s get his voice in there.” They gave me and Angela this freedom to experiment and that’s why I think they embraced all these different stylistic choices that come up in the movie. We needed to capture the heart and soul of the book and they were so open to playing with ideas when approaching writing the screenplay.

Kouguell: There were elements that added a level of humor and tone, such as the fictionalized names of the banks.

GoldbergThat was another way of approaching the question of how do we capture the book. He had this way of walking in the world and seeing hypocrisy and seeing these institutions as blank places and we embraced that idea. Even the doctor who he goes to after the war was named Dr. No One. The movie is told through Cherry’s perspective and that is how he sees the world. Some of those little nods are taken from the book.

KouguellWords of wisdom for screenwriters?

GoldbergMy first advice is that life is really long and it’s really challenging, so you have to keep writing. It takes a long time; people always want their first thing made. Perseverance is half the battle to being a writer. That’s a big one.

Cherry is slated for a theatrical release on February 26 and will release on Apple TV+ March 12. 

SUSAN’S INTERVIEW: ‘Son of the South’ Writer/Director Barry Alexander Brown

Susan Kouguell speaks with ‘Son of the South’ Writer, Director and Editor Barry Alexander Brown about the film that was twelve years in the making, the adaptation process, and how his background as an editor informed his work as a screenwriter.

(L to R) Sharonne Lanier and Lucas Till in a scene from SON OF THE SOUTH, Courtesy Vertical Entertainment
(L to R) Sharonne Lanier and Lucas Till in a scene from SON OF THE SOUTH, Courtesy Vertical Entertainment

Executive produced by his longtime friend and colleague Spike Lee, Son of the South is based on civil rights activist Bob Zellner and his autobiography, “The Wrong Side of Murder Creek”. The film follows Bob Zellner, a Klansman’s grandson, who must choose which side of history to be on during the Civil Rights Movement. Defying his family and white Southern norms, Zellner fought against social injustice, repression, and violence to change the world around him.

This film, which was twelve years in the making and is dedicated to the late civil rights icon John Lewis, takes place in Alexander’s hometown of Montgomery, Alabama where the real-life events occurred.

About Barry Alexander Brown

As a young director, Brown was nominated for an Oscar for his first film, a feature-length documentary about the rise of the anti-Vietnam War Movement titled, The War at Home. He edited numerous Spike Lee films, including Do the Right ThingMalcolm XInside Man, and BlacKkKlansman for which Lee won a best-adapted screenplay Oscar and Brown was nominated for best editor. Brown has worked with Mira Nair on the Oscar-nominated Salaam Bombay!, Madonna, In Bed With Madonna, Adrien Brody on Clean, and Tony Kaye’s Detachment. Brown was recently honored at UNESCO and AFI’s World Peace Initiative Awards. He received the Lifetime Achievement Award and their World Peace & Tolerance Narrative Feature Film Award for Son of The South.

Barry Alexander Brown
Barry Alexander Brown

Mr. Brown describes his relationship with Bob Zellner as: “We were both liberal white boys from Alabama and we easily got along.”

Susan Kouguell: Tell me about the adaptation process.

Barry Alexander Brown: The first thing I gravitated towards was that The Wrong Side of Murder Creek should be a movie, but the scope was way too big for one film. I wasn’t interested in doing a movie that quickly skips through history. I was writing the script around the same time Bob was writing his book. So much of what I wrote was more based on lots of my conversations with him.

It took me almost two decades to tell his story in a concise way that would convey the importance of what he did and who he was. It took me forever to decide which part of this story that I can take that will make a good story, with a good beginning, middle and end.

You have to write a story that makes sense, and write dialogue that is sayable for the actors and helps move the story along, and come up with dialogue that sometimes paraphrases what happened. This film gave me the ability to say things I wanted to say things about what Bob and I grew up in.

Kouguell: Did you consult on the script with Mr. Zellner?

Brown: I sent him scenes and sometimes he would tell me more information and stories because I wasn’t there when these things happened — he’s about 20 years older than I am.

Barry Alexander Brown on set 'Son of the South', courtesy of Vertical Entertainment
Barry Alexander Brown on set ‘Son of the South’, courtesy of Vertical Entertainment

Kouguell: How did your extensive work as a film editor inform you as a screenwriter?

Brown: With film editing, you’re taught so much about pacing and how to get in and out of scenes. Editing informed a lot of how I wrote. There are so many times a scene would stand alone but more often than not it actually creates a greater sequence of scenes that is all about one thing and what the characters are feeling. I’ve come to understand that one scene doesn’t always stand-alone, it’s a piece of a sequence of scenes.

I’ve worked with very good scripts, and you begin to grasp what writers are doing and also in terms of their language. I remember reading the James Joyce quote about Ulysses – ‘I felt like a thief walking around Dublin stealing people’s lines”. I think it’s good to go around town and listen to the way people talk.’Son of the South’ Script-to-Screen, Courtesy Barry Alexander BrownVolume 90%

Kouguell: There are some humorous moments in the film that offer a good balance with the dramatic events unfolding.

BrownAlthough this film is a drama, I still wanted to have humor. Mainly, and why I wanted to use it is because the south is a funny place and they like to play with language. Many films that are set in the south, I don’t recognize these people that are somewhat dour and have no sense of humor; that’s not the south I know.

Two examples of these moments are when Younger asks Bob “Are you really a communist? Say something in communist for me” and Bob’s own repeated line, “I’ll try anything three times”.

KouguellYour advice to screenwriters?

BrownGive every character their own life. Some people have very stylized scripts and sometimes that really works but I don’t think I could do that. I want to understand everybody. There are no small parts. If someone walks into a scene and they have a line or two, you have to know who they are and give them something in that line or two because this is a real person with a real personality.

Also, one of my rules is I should be able to sit down with somebody and tell the story I’m writing but tell it as a story not a script. For me it’s very important that not only is the journey interesting but that it’s going somewhere, so when you get to the end someone isn’t thinking ‘What? That’s it? Why did you tell me the story?’

Susan’s Interview: “Acasa, My Home” Documentary Filmmaker Radu Ciorniciuc

Filmmaker Radu Ciorniciuc speaks candidly with Susan Kouguell about his debut feature film, “Acasa, My Home,” and how the importance of building empathy and trust with your subjects can advance the context of your story and provides insight into his writing process with co-writer Lina Vdovîi.

SUSAN KOUGUELL

JAN 29, 2021

Filmmaker Radu Ciorniciuc, Photo by Alex Galmeanu
Filmmaker Radu Ciorniciuc, Photo by Alex Galmeanu

Radu Ciorniciuc’s debut feature film, Acasa, My Home, premiered at the 2020 Sundance Film Festival, where it was honored with a Special Jury Award for Cinematography. The film has played at over 60 festivals around the world and has been nominated for the IDA Documentary Awards, European Film Awards, and Cinema Eye Honors. The film opened in the U.S. on January 15th courtesy of Zeitgeist Films in association with Kino Lorber.

In the wilderness of the Bucharest Delta, an abandoned water reservoir just outside the bustling metropolis, the Enache family lived in perfect harmony with nature for two decades, sleeping in a hut on the lakeshore, catching fish barehanded, and following the rhythm of the seasons. When this area is transformed into a public national park, the nine children and their parents are forced to leave behind their unconventional life and move to the city. This is a compelling tale of an impoverished family living on the fringes of society in Romania, fighting for acceptance and their own version of freedom.

In 2012, Radu Ciorniciuc co-founded the first independent media organization in Romania – Casa Jurnalistului, a community of reporters specializing in in-depth, long-form and multimedia reporting. Since then, he has been working as a long-form writer and undercover investigative reporter. His research focuses on human rights, animal welfare and environmental issues across the globe. His investigative and reporting work was published on most of the major international media organizations in the world – Channel 4 News, The Guardian, Al Jazeera, etc. – and received national and international awards. 

His journalistic work was acknowledged by Royal Television Society UK (2014), Amnesty International UK (2014), Harold Wincott Awards for Business, Economic and Financial Journalism (2016), and by other international and national prestigious institutions.

Lina Vdovîi (co-writer) is an award-winning independent long-form reporter covering migration, conflict zones, poverty, education, and social integration. In 2012, she joined the Romanian Centre for Investigative Journalism and, in 2014, became a fellow in the Balkan Fellowship for Journalistic Excellence. In 2014, she was awarded 1st place in the Feature Writing category at Premiile Superscrieri. In 2015, Lina received the distinction Young Journalist of the Year, awarded by Freedom House, Romania. Her work is published in both national outlets and international publications, such as in The Guardian, the EU Observer, Courrier International, Al-Jazeera, Transitions online, RFE/RL, Berlin Policy Journal, and Balkan Insight.

Acasa, My Home © Manifest Film, Courtesy of Zeitgeist Film
Acasa, My Home © Manifest Film, Courtesy of Zeitgeist Film

Susan Kouguell: How did you initially meet the Enache family?

Radu Ciorniciuc: It was in 2016 when we heard the Romanian government was going to give the highest environmental protection to a place that was known for the garbage that was stored there, and all the bad urban legends like people get killed in this delta. It was quite a story for me living just two streets away from there.

At first, I just wanted to report on how these authorities were going to make these places accessible to the general public. What they discovered inside was something amazing and truly valuable; a delicate and complex ecosystem where hundreds of species of birds and animals and plants found their home despite it being in one of the most polluted capitals in Europe.

For me, as a reporter, it was quite interesting. With the co-screenwriter of the film, Lina Vdovîi, we started doing interviews and one thing led to another. We met two of the boys, half-naked 400 meters from the city center with their long hair and their funny way of speaking, coming out from the bush. It was quite an image and obviously, we wanted to understand where they came from. They took us to their father, and this is where we learned that the father was quite essential to the whole project and campaign of making this is a nature park. He was working closely with all the researchers, scientists, and other journalists who would come to write or promote the place. He knew everything about the place, he was also acting as a ranger with all the poachers that would come.

We had the privilege on our first encounter to have him see us as another crew of journalists and he took us on this very well-scripted tour of his, explaining the main things of the ecosystem, acting as a modern-day Robinson Crusoe – he was very well aware of his character. Weeks passed and we kept coming back and the father asked: ‘What kind of journalists are you guys? When are you finishing your story?’ We said what’s happening here deserves more time to properly understand the context in which they were living.

Kouguell: You mentioned that in order to create a feeling of familiarity and home with the family, the camera was always shooting at the eye level of the characters and at close distances, especially when highly emotional events were taking place. How were you able to gain the family’s trust?

Ciorniciuc: This trust you build with time. It’s something that is evolving and shifting. As long as there is empathy, understanding and fairness– and this goes with every relationship– I think there are strong bridges to be built.

Kouguell: You co-wrote the film with Lina Vdovîi – please tell me about the writing process.

Ciorniciuc: We both come from a writing background; we both started working in long format, as nonfiction writers. For me it was essential in making this film to always have what I call the bible of the film, which is the treatment, the script. It was very important at different stages of the project so everyone on the project, including myself, knows what’s going on, knows the material we can show, and also clarifies our intention.

Obviously, there are many ways of making a film. Documentary has shifted in form over the years, which is a beautiful thing. There is nothing scripted in the film; I or my crew, never fed them lines.

The truth can have a lot of forms; there is the journalistic truth, artistic truth, and human truth and that can be attained with different forms.

The way we tried to direct some of the scenes, for example, the conflict scenes with the family was that we did our best in becoming mediators between the family members. We were already the people they were turning to when they were having hard times. For example, with the scene with Vali and his father, they had been struggling with each other for about three months and never talked with each other. That was understandable; I come from a patriarchal family and culture and I understand that embracing your vulnerabilities and communicating them can be seen as a sign of weakness. One day I sat with them and said, “I probably won’t be here (with you) in 10 or 20 years and you probably will, and to solve some of these issues you need to talk.” They only needed this to start expressing their frustrations that were there for years.

The way we scripted it was to imagine drawing a red line through 300 hours of footage, which is something that we had with many possibilities of telling the story, including finding an abandoned son of Gica, that exploded our story. We were two years in the making of the film when we followed that storyline. It’s great when you’re making independent documentaries because you have the liberty of following whatever you feel is important.

[Writing a Documentary Film With No Rules]

Writing helps me understand where the end of the film will be. When the written treatment was matching what we had in our rough cuts, that’s when I knew this is what we wanted to say, the things we discovered, what we considered valuable and truthful and worth sharing with the world. This is why I believe in the written process even in the conventional documentary.

Kouguell: You captured people’s intentions yet remained nonjudgmental in conveying the material even when we see how various people are not making the best choices.

Ciorniciuc: You’re a filmmaker and you know that learning the nuance to judgment takes time and education. It’s hard not to judge some of the decisions the father made regarding the children, but understanding that those decisions come from a place that made him feel confident, that the things he was doing were for the best of his loved ones, that for me is context. It took me time to give him a break, and it took me time to accept the fact that those children were deprived of a lot of the opportunities that they should have 400 meters away from them. One judges things on how culture influences you or your family, education, community, and so on.

I think in telling a story like this one it was important for the characters to tell their story, tell their reality in how they see it. I wanted to make a film from within the family rather than about the family. This was obviously tricky because many times we had to fight with our perceptions and our own judgments.

Kouguell: It was powerful to see the footage of Charles, Prince of Wales in your film. It wasn’t just about the celebrity factor, but it put it in the context of how important this land was. How were you able to obtain the footage?

Ciorniciuc: We got it from the official news agency in Romania. We got lucky; if we actually asked the Royal House of Windsor, we would never have gotten it. It mattered to them that our core team were journalists, including myself, and we were known to them and they trusted us.

Kouguell: Has the Enache family seen the film?

Ciorniciuc: Yes. Some parts they enjoyed and some parts they were reminded of the many hard situations they have been through in the last four years. I think it had a very therapeutic effect especially on the mother who told me that after all this they are still together, she can still feel that she has a family, which is something I am very proud of. I was very nervous showing the film to the family but at the end of the day, it worked very well for the family. 

Susan Kouguell, award-winning screenwriter and filmmaker, is a senior contributing editor for Script Magazine, and is the author of The Savvy Screenwriter: How to Sell Your Screenplay (and Yourself) Without Selling Out! and Savvy Characters Sell Screenplays!: A comprehensive guide to crafting winning characters with film analyses and screenwriting exercisesAs chairperson of Su-City Pictures East, LLC, a motion picture consulting company founded in 1990, Kouguell works as a script doctor and post-production consultant with over 1,000 writers, filmmakers, executives and studios worldwide. Her extensive background includes work as story analyst and story editor for many studios, including Miramax, Paramount, and Viacom, acquisitions consultant for Warner Bros., writer on voice-over narrations for Miramax, associate producer on two features, and over a dozen feature writing assignments for independent companies. Susan teaches screenwriting at SUNY College at Purchase and is a visiting assistant professor at Pratt Institute. Her short films are in the Museum of Modern Art’s permanent collection and archives and were included in the Whitney Museum’s Biennial. Follow Susan on Twitter: @SKouguellFacebook, and Instagram @slkfilms

Susan’s interview with “Donut King” Documentary Filmmaker Alice Gu

Director, cinematographer and writer Alice Gu talks about her feature directorial debut, The Donut King, in an insightful discussion that includes DIY filmmaking, discovering the story and establishing truthful relationships with interviewees

SUSAN KOUGUELLNOV 3, 2020

Click to tweet this article to your friends and followers!

Alice Gu
Alice Gu

Director, cinematographer and writer Alice Gu talks about her feature directorial debut, The Donut King, in an insightful discussion that includes DIY filmmaking, discovering the story and establishing truthful relationships with interviewees.

The Donut King tells the unlikely story of Ngoy, a Cambodian refugee who arrived in America in 1975 with nothing and set out to build a multi-million-dollar empire by baking America’s favorite pastry, the donut. Ngoy soon found himself living a classic rags to riches narrative after sponsoring hundreds of visas for fellow Cambodian immigrants, helping them get on their feet in a new land by teaching them the ways of the donut business and amassing a small personal fortune. By the mid 1990’s, Cambodian-Americans owned nearly 80% of the donut industry as a result of his influence.

The Donut King is a story of tenacity, survival, redemption, and above all else, the power of the American Dream. The Donut King is executive produced by Academy Award-winner Freida Lee Mock and produced by Logan Content in association with Scott Free Productions.

ALICE GU (Director/DP/Writer) A Los Angeles native, Alice began her career as a Director of Photography, working with renowned directors Werner Herzog, Stacy Peralta, and Rory Kennedy, among others. “Take Every Wave: The Life of Laird Hamilton” made its premiere at the Sundance Film Festival in 2017, a documentary film lensed by Gu and directed by Academy Award-nominated director, Rory Kennedy.

KOUGUELL: I understand it was your nanny who introduced you to the concept of “Cambodian donuts” and Ted Ngoy’s story. What grabbed your attention about this story?

GU: When I read about Ted’s story there were several things that grabbed my attention—but not everything made it into the movie due to time, otherwise it would have been three hours long. First, he was a boy born in poverty in Cambodia. Second, in high school, he falls in love with the daughter of a high-ranking official and they have a whole Romeo and Juliet moment where they are forbidden to be together—he actually stabs himself three times and goes on a hunger strike and she takes pills, and they are both almost dead—and finally her parents send them off to live in the countryside.

I was only casually familiar with the atrocities that happened in Cambodia at that time. Ted escaped from that as a refugee penniless and within three years becoming a millionaire and then he lost it all and ended up destitute. His life was so topsy-turvy. Ted’s life read like a movie, like fiction. All of that appealed to me.

Also, the personal component resonated with me. I’m a child of Chinese parents who were forced to leave China with just the clothes on their back.

Ted Ngoy
Ted Ngoy

KOUGUELL: Tell me about the evolution of the project.

GU: This is a case of leap before you look and ignorance is bliss because if you knew how hard it was and all the challenges that would be coming your way, I think it would have been too daunting. Then I thought, I can do this, I’m a DP and I can shoot this, I can get a camera. And then taking a very much DIY approach to it.

KOUGUELL: How long was the shoot?

GU: We shot on and off over the course of eight to ten months. I would have loved to have compressed that, but it was very much DIY—when we had money and time available, we would go back and shoot this project.

KOUGUELL: When you planned out your documentary, did you work from an outline or any source material?

GU: When I met Ted—and that was meeting him over Facebook—we talked several times and he said he just wrote a book, a memoir that’s coming out in a month, and that he would give me a copy. I used that as our bible, a starting point of getting to know characters and getting familiar with everything. But, as we went along and started filming more and meeting more people, it really wasn’t just his book that we followed, we realized there was so much depth and so many other characters and substories we wanted to tell. We used Ted’s memoir as a beginning to research material and as a jumping off point, but the script itself revealed itself to us during the process.

donut king

KOUGUELL: How did you establish trust with your subjects, including Ted Ngoy and his family members and colleagues?

GU: That is a product of time. Ted was approaching 80 with nothing else to prove, nowhere to hide. He was a man in his golden years and reflecting on all the good and all the bad. When I approached him about making this documentary, I told him it’s not going to be all the good, it’s going to be warts and all—it’s going to be the good, bad and ugly and are you okay with that, and he said yes.

Over the next 12 months the trust deepened. There was a difference between our first interviews and when we filmed later; his guard was really let down. It was about having honest and true intentions yourself when making a film and that will show and reflect in your relationships and how you approach everything. The other element is persistence. You will get a lot of no’s in the beginning, like from the other characters who are in the film, and eventually after months go by, they say, “Oh, she’s still here? I guess she’s here to stay, and she’s still asking me to be interviewed.” It’s patience, persistence and really having true intentions.,

KOUGUELL: Final words to share about your project?

GU: I love documentaries and I loved them for such a long time. My editor and co-writer Carol Martori is passionate about documentaries and the art form, and we both knew early on this story is so complex and there are so many ways to tell it. There is an American dream story, there’s an immigrant story, a rags-to-riches story, a David-and-Goliath story, and a story about helping other refugees getting their start and rescuing them from refugee camps. There is also what we call the Donut Shop 2.0, the second generation. We have all of these stories, and the bigger immigrant story and history lesson, and we thought, how do we fit this all in here and not be a complete mess. It was a bit daunting.

We took inspiration from narrative. Our approach was to have a narrative structure, a narrative arc. We also wanted to do something fresh and different, and I hope that comes across, as an interesting way to tell the story.

« Older posts Newer posts »