A DOCUMENTARY CALLS OUT ITS GENRE
`Subject' explores a corner of filmmaking it says needs to care more about the truth
“The Staircase.”
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Documentaries tell the truth. But not the whole truth. What motivated you to tackle
These films — now more prevalent all these topics? and popular than ever — do TIEXIERA >> Camilla was a journalist more than merely list facts: They for the Financial Times in the tell a story, a narrative shaped not Middle East before she made her by the subjects (except in the cases first documentary. When she entered of a few celebrities), but by an unseen this world, she was shocked person behind the camera. that there were no rules whatsoever. People agree to be in documentaries It's like the Wild West. for a variety of reasons but often I had been a film editor for about don't realize how much control 15 years and found myself making they are giving up about their life these really intense decisions about stories. people's lives or communities in
The new documentary “Subject” the edit room without ever meeting explores this topic and the ethical them or knowing their hopes issues around it, interviewing people and dreams for the project. The better who were in the documentaries I did my job the more sensationalized “The Staircase,” “Hoop Dreams,” some of these decisions felt, “Capturing the Friedmans,” “The which led me to producing and directing. Wolfpack” and “The Square.” (The So we were having these existential film will kick off its local theatrical crises. run today at Laemmle Glendale.) RATLIFF >> I met Camilla and Jen
Of course, these people are now five days before Netflix released all subjecting themselves to the process those episodes of “The Staircase,” a second time, but filmmakers which was dredging things back up Jennifer Tiexiera and Camilla for my family.
Hall say they were committed to a When Camilla told me about more open and moral way of making “Subject,” I liked the idea of finding documentaries. Tiexiera spoke a better way that we can treat recently by video along with Margie people in our films. I said, “Maybe Ratliff, who serves as a producer I could consult — I don't want to but also appears on camera — she be in it, for sure.” It was only later was thrust into the spotlight as a when the HBO Max series was beginning young adult when her father, Michael and I met Jesse Friedman Peterson, was accused of murdering (the focus of “Capturing the Fried*mans”) his wife, a story captured in and the rest that I realized
QI can't hide from this, and if I can start to make it better for other people, then I can kind of sacrifice myself.
QHow was your process different from a typical documentary?
TIEXIERA >> After we did our rough cut — the process was extremely lengthy — we had each participant go through their own sections and ultimately have creative agency and then sent it to the other directors interviewed in the film and made sure that they felt represented correctly. And we gave each of the original directors of the films we focused on the opportunity to workshop with us as long as they wanted. Some went on for months and there were long, awkward conversations, but they ultimately made the film so much stronger because it was so much more representative of everyone's point of view.
In the first cut that (“Capturing the Friedmans” director) Andrew Jarecki saw, he said, “I'm just not feeling that closeness of me and
Jesse,” and he was right because that relationship he has with Jesse is separate from his relationship with “Capturing the Friedmans.”
There wasn't anything where we disagreed and it became problematic. It wasn't like things got omitted but it's more that we were able to protect people's mental health and not retraumatize them.
We are huge supporters of DAWG, the Documentary Accountability Working Group, which put together a framework of things to consider when making a documentary where there is this power imbalance between the filmmaker and ... potential participant.
RATLIFF >> I've luckily been able to travel around the globe with “Subject” and talk to so many different filmmakers from different areas about the connection that you have to the community, to the story. Why are you telling it? And are you thinking about the impact that you want the film to have and how your participants can be a part of that impact? And I think those are all such important questions to talk with your participants and really figure out before you even start picking up the camera.
I'm now taking real steps to make change. I've started a nonprofit, the Documentary Participants Empowerment Alliance, that deals with legal access, advocacy and mental health to guide filmmakers for a duty of care for participants.
QThe film also includes the idea that film festivals share some responsibility. Is that changing?
TIEXIERA >> At Sundance, there have been films with really questionable methods as far as the treatment of the participants. But last year for the first time on the Sundance application was a question about participant wellness and care and the steps that were taken during the filmmaking process. And that was a huge win for all of us.
QSo are you hopeful that we will see substantial change in the next few years?
RATLIFF >> One indicator is at universities — we've been showing “Subject” and having conversations with film departments and legal departments about these provisions for ethical making. There are new classes being taught about how to make your films ethically. TIEXIERA >> The question will be, how do we fit these changes into small and shrinking budgets? But there's always a way to figure it out.
On my last series with HBO, we had therapy in the line item budget. So this is not a pipe dream.