With over twenty years of experience in independent film programming, curation, and production communities, JON FITZGERALD is the author of FILMMAKING FOR CHANGE - 2ND EDITION, from Michael Wiese Productions. In addition to authoring both books, Jon has been Director of Festivals at the American Film Institute, Vice-President of Programming at Ifilm.com, and Executive Director of the Santa Barbara International Film festival. He and I spoke recently about how and why films affect change in the world, what films reach mass audiences, and his favorite cinematic moment from one of the best documentaries of the last decade.
You can order Jon's book from Michael Wiese Productions here.
Dave Watson: First, congratulations on the book. Why a second edition?
Jon Fitzgerald: Thank you! Yes, very excited to be in a position to essentially re-launch Filmmaking for Change. There are a few factors that I believe led to MWP suggesting the second edition.
The first is that we are clearly going through some challenging times, as a nation, with changes in the white house…and as a people, whether it’s human rights and immigration, or health, or the environment. People are speaking out now more than ever, and movements are taking shape. At its core, Filmmaking for Change is anchored in the belief that film and media is a powerful form of mass communication we want everyone to see this as a vehicle to share their stories. You don’t need years of filmmaking experience or graduate degree in film to tell a great story, particularly in the documentary space. Low barrier to entry. Yes, you need some experienced team members but the examples in this book demonstrate how folks from all walks of life found their way into the producer’s chair.
Another key driver was my interest in adding a section on Activation. Providing readers and emerging filmmakers with more resources and tools around the the idea taking viewers to the next stage. The hope is audiences see these engaging movies and are inspired to take action to make a difference...so it’s a step beyond “filmmaking.” It’s putting the “cause” into play.
DW: You start the book with chapters titled The Open Road and The Shift is on. Do you see the future of filmmaking that reaches mass audiences as being up for grabs? A market able to be manipulated toward films that affect change?
JF: YES, perfect transition from last question, as the answers are connected. The audiences and thirst for documentary film in particular has evolved in the 5 years since the first edition. There are many factors contributing to this, but it’s really the double play of (a) Netflix bringing many docs to the attention of the masses and (b) more docs being made and available than ever before. I also think it’s true that audiences respond more and more to stories that connect them to the world around them.
The key, of course, is taking the “experience” of seeing the film to the “action” stage that should follow. There are companies that are spending considerable amount of time gauging the effects these movies are having on “causes.” Measuring the change. The Lear Center at USC and certainly Participant Media continues to support these efforts.
DW: You note that a filmmaker can acquire all the tools necessary for a film for under $5,000. I’ve heard this for over fifteen years. Do you know or see many people taking advantage of this?
JF: Yes, I’ve seen it many times, and have done it myself (with The Back Nine). Of course you need some help and some staff willing to contribute time without pay, in exchange for deferrals or ownership. The important point here is that you can literally buy the camera and recording equipment, combine that with some back up drives and editing software and you’re on your way. You don’t need a big crew, production designers and special effects.
DW: Do young filmmakers in particular try to affect change?
JF: In many circles, we’re seeing more social and cultural responsibility on the part of young adults. I have a 15 year-old and she has created a charity. Many kids are finding a way to give back, and some are doing this with filmmaking tools. I’m teaching a Filmmaking for Change course at a high school. You would not have seen that twenty years ago.
Kids today are much more comfortable with technology and video today as well. Now put this together with someone looking to make a difference. That’s a good fit!
DW: You discuss a Cause category. Does the content supersede skill with these films?
JF: Bigger studio projects, particularly narratives, require much more skill, but the quality projects still start with a good story. The unique aspect to the “cause” category is that someone may have a particular category of interest, be it animal rights, or the environment. They do some research and come up with a story to share. As mentioned above, they don’t have to have years of experience to pull it off. So yes, there are more “cause” movies made about an issue with less skilled filmmakers than the average of Hollywood movies.
DW: A friend recently said we live in a golden era of documentaries. Would you agree?
JF: I’ve seen this term used a lot over the past five-to-ten years. We’ve certainly seen the genre evolve more in that span than ever before, and audience has grown for them. I think it’s hard to pinpoint exactly when it started or when we shift to next stage, but it’s a very exciting time for sure.
DW: You also discuss playing the festival circuit, in the U.S. and internationally. How crucial is it to participate in these? Does the film do a lot of work for you?
JF: Festivals serve many purposes. They provide a platform form filmmakers to be discovered, to find an audience. They are avenue for audiences to see films, and press for films, they may not otherwise know about. AND distributors acquire movies out of festivals and license them to many of the cable and digital platforms so audiences ultimately, hopefully, find them at home.
DW: In that same vein, distribution seems key. How has that changed since the first edition?
JF: It’s still the wild wild west. Nobody knows for sure how it’s going to all shake out. What we do know is there are a lot more movies - thousands - finding homes at Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, and many others. Vudu, Flix Premiere, and Mubi are all licensing as well. I believe Roku boasts of over 2,500 channels! There were not as many films or outlets back then…and you add Vimeo into the mix, where filmmakers don’t need a distributor and can make real money.
DW: In Inconvenient Truth recently had a sequel which appeared to have much less of an impact, partly due to reviews it seems. Do the reviews matter that much when it comes to films affecting change?
JF: That’s a tricky one. That first one really planted a flag, and won the Oscar. Since that film came out, the game has changed and it’s a much more crowded landscape. It’s really hard to be successful in the theatrical space, especially for docs, which many people assume they can catch on the smaller screen at home.
I do think reviews matter for the majority of the “cause” documentary audience. It’s noisy out there. And we have Rotten Tomatoes. These movies don’t have big marketing budgets, generally, so reviews can help.
DW: Roger Ebert once said he thought films were more reflections of society than agents of change, yet films can move people. Would you agree with his statement?
JF: I actually think it can depend on the category. Some films have clearly made a difference. Just look at Supersize Me. McDonalds changes its menu after that movie. Court cases have been overturned. Companies are still digging into the Measurement of these movies and trying to get a sense of what has “changed” as result of the movies. Hard to quantify for some. I would argue that just providing education or sharing new insights around an issue will have an impact on people, and the world.
DW: What is the most impactful film you’ve seen motivate and reach a wide audience?
JF: The first Inconvenient Truth certainly had an impact, particularly with the tours Gore did. The Cove generated tremendous press, petitions and some changes, and certainly reached a wide audience for a doc. There’s a terrific doc called Code, which explores the reasons for the gender and minority hiring gap among software engineers. According the filmmaker Robin Hauser Reynolds it’s had quite an impact, as she’s invited to speak for companies and orgs all over the world.
DW: What is your favorite cinematic moment?
JF: Wow, this is a tough one…trying to think of scenes that stuck with me when I was younger…but so many and all kids stuff. Not very “influential."
I think it may be more appropriate to speak to the movie that influenced me to the point where I knew I wanted to be making and supporting social impact movies. It was seeing The Cove. Not only was this movie powerful, covering full range of emotions, and the core goal of the film is certainly the most important element, I couldn’t help but recognize the storytelling techniques and structure. The movie plays like a narrative thriller. As if they are planning a heist, and they have the experts and are devising strategy to get cameras in the rocks - all in the name of the “cause” to expose this horrific dolphin slaughter. Not the happiest thought to end on, but truly inspirational to see how a team puts in years of effort to cover their bases AND present a world class motion picture. Well deserving the Oscar for Best Documentary that year.
Clip: The Cove
You can order Jon's book from Michael Wiese Productions here.
Dave Watson: First, congratulations on the book. Why a second edition?
Jon Fitzgerald: Thank you! Yes, very excited to be in a position to essentially re-launch Filmmaking for Change. There are a few factors that I believe led to MWP suggesting the second edition.
The first is that we are clearly going through some challenging times, as a nation, with changes in the white house…and as a people, whether it’s human rights and immigration, or health, or the environment. People are speaking out now more than ever, and movements are taking shape. At its core, Filmmaking for Change is anchored in the belief that film and media is a powerful form of mass communication we want everyone to see this as a vehicle to share their stories. You don’t need years of filmmaking experience or graduate degree in film to tell a great story, particularly in the documentary space. Low barrier to entry. Yes, you need some experienced team members but the examples in this book demonstrate how folks from all walks of life found their way into the producer’s chair.
Another key driver was my interest in adding a section on Activation. Providing readers and emerging filmmakers with more resources and tools around the the idea taking viewers to the next stage. The hope is audiences see these engaging movies and are inspired to take action to make a difference...so it’s a step beyond “filmmaking.” It’s putting the “cause” into play.
DW: You start the book with chapters titled The Open Road and The Shift is on. Do you see the future of filmmaking that reaches mass audiences as being up for grabs? A market able to be manipulated toward films that affect change?
JF: YES, perfect transition from last question, as the answers are connected. The audiences and thirst for documentary film in particular has evolved in the 5 years since the first edition. There are many factors contributing to this, but it’s really the double play of (a) Netflix bringing many docs to the attention of the masses and (b) more docs being made and available than ever before. I also think it’s true that audiences respond more and more to stories that connect them to the world around them.
The key, of course, is taking the “experience” of seeing the film to the “action” stage that should follow. There are companies that are spending considerable amount of time gauging the effects these movies are having on “causes.” Measuring the change. The Lear Center at USC and certainly Participant Media continues to support these efforts.
DW: You note that a filmmaker can acquire all the tools necessary for a film for under $5,000. I’ve heard this for over fifteen years. Do you know or see many people taking advantage of this?
JF: Yes, I’ve seen it many times, and have done it myself (with The Back Nine). Of course you need some help and some staff willing to contribute time without pay, in exchange for deferrals or ownership. The important point here is that you can literally buy the camera and recording equipment, combine that with some back up drives and editing software and you’re on your way. You don’t need a big crew, production designers and special effects.
DW: Do young filmmakers in particular try to affect change?
JF: In many circles, we’re seeing more social and cultural responsibility on the part of young adults. I have a 15 year-old and she has created a charity. Many kids are finding a way to give back, and some are doing this with filmmaking tools. I’m teaching a Filmmaking for Change course at a high school. You would not have seen that twenty years ago.
Kids today are much more comfortable with technology and video today as well. Now put this together with someone looking to make a difference. That’s a good fit!
DW: You discuss a Cause category. Does the content supersede skill with these films?
JF: Bigger studio projects, particularly narratives, require much more skill, but the quality projects still start with a good story. The unique aspect to the “cause” category is that someone may have a particular category of interest, be it animal rights, or the environment. They do some research and come up with a story to share. As mentioned above, they don’t have to have years of experience to pull it off. So yes, there are more “cause” movies made about an issue with less skilled filmmakers than the average of Hollywood movies.
DW: A friend recently said we live in a golden era of documentaries. Would you agree?
JF: I’ve seen this term used a lot over the past five-to-ten years. We’ve certainly seen the genre evolve more in that span than ever before, and audience has grown for them. I think it’s hard to pinpoint exactly when it started or when we shift to next stage, but it’s a very exciting time for sure.
DW: You also discuss playing the festival circuit, in the U.S. and internationally. How crucial is it to participate in these? Does the film do a lot of work for you?
JF: Festivals serve many purposes. They provide a platform form filmmakers to be discovered, to find an audience. They are avenue for audiences to see films, and press for films, they may not otherwise know about. AND distributors acquire movies out of festivals and license them to many of the cable and digital platforms so audiences ultimately, hopefully, find them at home.
DW: In that same vein, distribution seems key. How has that changed since the first edition?
JF: It’s still the wild wild west. Nobody knows for sure how it’s going to all shake out. What we do know is there are a lot more movies - thousands - finding homes at Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, and many others. Vudu, Flix Premiere, and Mubi are all licensing as well. I believe Roku boasts of over 2,500 channels! There were not as many films or outlets back then…and you add Vimeo into the mix, where filmmakers don’t need a distributor and can make real money.
DW: In Inconvenient Truth recently had a sequel which appeared to have much less of an impact, partly due to reviews it seems. Do the reviews matter that much when it comes to films affecting change?
JF: That’s a tricky one. That first one really planted a flag, and won the Oscar. Since that film came out, the game has changed and it’s a much more crowded landscape. It’s really hard to be successful in the theatrical space, especially for docs, which many people assume they can catch on the smaller screen at home.
I do think reviews matter for the majority of the “cause” documentary audience. It’s noisy out there. And we have Rotten Tomatoes. These movies don’t have big marketing budgets, generally, so reviews can help.
DW: Roger Ebert once said he thought films were more reflections of society than agents of change, yet films can move people. Would you agree with his statement?
JF: I actually think it can depend on the category. Some films have clearly made a difference. Just look at Supersize Me. McDonalds changes its menu after that movie. Court cases have been overturned. Companies are still digging into the Measurement of these movies and trying to get a sense of what has “changed” as result of the movies. Hard to quantify for some. I would argue that just providing education or sharing new insights around an issue will have an impact on people, and the world.
DW: What is the most impactful film you’ve seen motivate and reach a wide audience?
JF: The first Inconvenient Truth certainly had an impact, particularly with the tours Gore did. The Cove generated tremendous press, petitions and some changes, and certainly reached a wide audience for a doc. There’s a terrific doc called Code, which explores the reasons for the gender and minority hiring gap among software engineers. According the filmmaker Robin Hauser Reynolds it’s had quite an impact, as she’s invited to speak for companies and orgs all over the world.
DW: What is your favorite cinematic moment?
JF: Wow, this is a tough one…trying to think of scenes that stuck with me when I was younger…but so many and all kids stuff. Not very “influential."
I think it may be more appropriate to speak to the movie that influenced me to the point where I knew I wanted to be making and supporting social impact movies. It was seeing The Cove. Not only was this movie powerful, covering full range of emotions, and the core goal of the film is certainly the most important element, I couldn’t help but recognize the storytelling techniques and structure. The movie plays like a narrative thriller. As if they are planning a heist, and they have the experts and are devising strategy to get cameras in the rocks - all in the name of the “cause” to expose this horrific dolphin slaughter. Not the happiest thought to end on, but truly inspirational to see how a team puts in years of effort to cover their bases AND present a world class motion picture. Well deserving the Oscar for Best Documentary that year.
Clip: The Cove
