Entries tagged with “IFC” from Rooftop Films Blog

Last night I attended the inaugural Cinema Eye Honors, co-chaired by AJ Schnack and Thom Powers, produced by Danielle DiGiacomo, and presented by IndiePix at the IFC Center. I have never been a big fan of awards for art. I'm a big sports fan, and a competitive person, but I don't judge success in anything based on being first, or on winning an award (or an Honor, or whatever you want to call it.)

I play on an amateur baseball team, and I want to win. But if winning were the only goal, I would've long since stopped playing, knowing that I'll never win the ultimate prize, a Major League World Series. I root for the Mets because, at least in my idealized conception of the team, the organization doesn't consider every season a failure if they don't win the championship. There are great playoff streaks, memorable games, astonishing plays, and touching personal stories, even in a losing season. (My Mets fandom could be its own blog, so I'll wrap this up by saying,) I appreciate sports in a manner more like the way many people appreciate art: I enjoy the aesthetics, the excitement, the emotion, and the narrative, and the end result is equally powerful whether it makes me happy or sad, so long as I am moved.

So the idea of awards for art seems to me somehow antithetical to the point of art; an award is an artificial high which doesn't stem from the work itself, but instead is bestowed upon the film in relation to other films. I had usually passed on the opportunity to vote in awards, even declining to submit a ballot for audience choice awards at festivals.

That said, when Sundance asked me to be on the jury in 2007, it took about half a second for me to say yes. So I had to ask myself if I was being a hypocrite. And in the end I came to the conclusion that has been arrived at by most thoughtful people who are in favor of awards for art: by giving awards to certain deserving works, you raise the level of attention for the form. As Thom Powers wrote in his introduction to the Cinema Eye Honors, "We don't expect you to agree with all our choices. Rather we hope this will be an occasion for increased debate and discussion." When I agreed to be on the jury at Sundance, I figured I could help out the types of groundbreaking, personal cinema that I think deserves more attention that it gets, even coming out of Sundance. And, of course, I was excited at the possibility of representing Rooftop Films, and raising the profile for the work that all of our programmers past and present (Joshua Breitbart, Moira Griffin, Dan Nuxoll, Sarah Palmer, Genevieve DeLaurier) believe in, fight for, want to see more of, and want to share.

Before and at the Cinema Eye Honors, there was some grumbling about the eligibility criteria, which (in short) limit the possible nominees to films that have played at major festivals, won awards at major festivals, or been seen by a certain number of people in theaters. There's a sense that these are the films that have already garnered some acclaim and audiences, even to the point of reaching wide national release and Academy Award recognition. I understand the feeling, because in a room full of avid festival watchers, these are the films we've heard about over and over.

But let's keep in mind the broader picture of audience awareness. By my estimation, via Box Office Mojo, no film nominated for Outstanding Achievement in Nonfiction Filmmaking (the equivalent of Best Picture), was seen by more than 150,000 people--less than the number of people living within three square miles of the IFC Center. Tony Kaye's abortion documentary "Lake of Fire" was perhaps seen by 3,000 people--about as many people as saw "Juno" on any given screen on any given day in the first week of its 104 day, 2,534 theater release. Correct me if my numbers are wrong (I'll admit I'm not an expert at box office stats), but outside the independent film community, these films have not been widely seen or recognized.

So these awards are certainly needed, and it's impressive what the Cinema Eye team has accomplished in such a short time. If they have the energy to do it again--and I hope they do--I think in order to gain wider relevance to the mainstream public, while also entertaining and informing Cinema Eye's core audience of indie film professionals, there are a couple of ways they might work to expand.

IndiePix and IFC have done a commendable job in supporting these awards, but jointly the Cinema Eye group could actively work to get a wider release for the films. The trick here would be getting distributors to believe that the Cinema Eye Honor would help a theatrical run. That's no mean feat, but I think it's a necessary and worthy goal in order to keep the awards from devolving into hermetic self-congratulation.

As for keeping this hermetic community happy, I think the eligibility should be expanded to include at least one category for the best film that didn't play at multiple fests, didn't win awards, and didn't get a theatrical release--essentially just reverse all the eligibility requirements for what they could call the Underexposed Award. It's more work for the nominators, but by finding the films that not even most industry insiders have seen, the Cinema Eye Honors could launch awareness for a truly marginalized film.

As an awards ceremony itself, the event was slick but homey, weighty when it needed to be but generally lighthearted, informative but not ponderous. I particularly loved the mid-ceremony discussion group, which featured the fierce insights of Esther B. Robinson and the goofy dynamism of Jason Kohn. Still, the structure and format felt like just about every other awards ceremony, which is a disappointment for an event that is celebrating narrative craft. Of course, coming from Rooftop Films--where for 12 years we've been trying to stage new ways of presenting films--I would level such a criticism, but I think if the Cinema Eye Honors want to want to break some boundaries and maintain this level of interest in the event itself, in the coming years they would do well to try to stretch the format of their show, much they way the artists they are honoring are challenging the formats of non-fiction filmmaking.

I think when the dance floor clears at the after-party and the dust settles back onto Thom's tux, the Cinema Eye Honors will have succeeded in generating some more attention for some artful and deserving documentaries. I hope that some of the more mainstream press picks up on the awards and brings the spirit of the event, and the films themselves, to a wider audience.

At Rooftop Films, I think we'll proudly stick to a non-competitive model, instead giving away grants for filmmakers' future productions. But I'm glad that the Cinema Eye Awards exist, and send a huge congratulations to AJ, Thom, Danielle, all the nominators and voters, and of course to all the filmmakers who have made these wonderful films, so deserving of attention.

* * * * *

For a rundown of the event, visit IndieWire. Here is their complete list of Cinema Eye winners:

Outstanding Achievement in Nonfiction Filmmaking
"Manda Bala (Send A Bullet)"
Director - Jason Kohn, Producers - Joey Frank, Jared Goldman & Jason Kohn

Outstanding Achievement in Direction
Alex Gibney
"Taxi to the Dark Side"

Outstanding Achievement in Production
Seth Kanegis, Tomas Radoor & Mikael Rieks
"Ghosts of Cite Soleil"

Outstanding Achievement in Cinematography
Heloisa Passos
"Manda Bala (Send A Bullet)"

Outstanding Achievement in Editing
Doug Abel, Jenny Golden & Andy Grieve
"Manda Bala (Send A Bullet)"

Outstanding Achievement in Graphic Design and Animation
Animation by Curious Pictures
"Chicago 10"

Outstanding International Feature
"The Monastery - Mr. Vig & The Nun" (above, middle)
Director - Pernille Rose Gronkjaer, Producer - Sigrid Dyekjaer

Outstanding Achievement in Debut Feature
"Billy the Kid" (above, top)
Director - Jennifer Venditti

Audience Choice Prize
"The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters" (above, bottom)
Director - Seth Gordon

Carroll Pickett was a minister in Huntsville, TX--a place best known for its many prisons and high number of executions--when two of his parishioners were taken hostage in an infamous prison riot in 1974. He was called in to try to broker peace, but his friends were eventually killed, and Pickett vowed to never return to that prison.

But years later, the prison asked him to become the chaplain, and he thought he could do some valuable work for the people there. Indeed he did, until suddenly his job description changed, and he was asked to be the minister presiding over executions. He would spend all day with the condemned, getting to know them, listening to their fears, concerns and confessions, and aiding any of their last wishes. Pickett agreed in principal with the death penalty, but he certainly had trepidation about the burden of task.

Over 15 years, he was at 95 executions, each a fascinating story. And over those years, Pickett's opinion of the death penalty changed completely.

"At the Death House Door," directed by Steve James and Peter Glibert, is a gripping, fascinating, powerful film about Pickett, about a wrongly-executed man named Carlos De Luna and his family, and about the tragic moral mistake that is the death penalty. Pickett's character unfolds with a stately grace. Being a old-fashioned Texan, he's reluctant to reveal his emotions, a trait which only makes them burn with more ferocity as you see them shine through. In the Q & A, he was asked why it took him so long to come to the conclusions he did, he said that he's "just hard-headed." But in the film, you see an amazing evolution of a man's feelings and ideology, a rare and stunning transformation to see in a documentary, or really in life in general (aren't we all pretty stubborn in our beliefs?)

After every execution, Pickett recorded an audio diary of what happened and what he was thinking and feeling. Until the documentary, not even his family knew these tapes existed, and watching Picket re-listening to them in the film is one of the most harrowing looks into man's soul that I've ever seen.

Finally, the execution of Hector De Luna, a man who Pickett suspected was innocent, is enough to set the ball in motion for Pickett to leave the prison and become an anti-death penalty activist. Emotionally, Pickett was verging on destruction. But he harnesses these core moral disturbances and uses them (and an array of factual evidence) to fight against the death penalty. He actively campaigns now, arguing that not only is the death penalty cruel and painful, not only are there irremediable mistakes made, not is the penalty ineffective as a criminal deterrent (there are hundreds more people on death row now than there were when it was reinstated 30 years ago), but it's a fundamentally immoral act, that's "not Christian, it's not American, and it's not Texan," a moral blight on our society which makes us weaker as a people.

In the Q & A, someone wondered if they film might be more effective if it also focused on some of the victims, and the filmmakers' rightly pointed out that in many ways this is a film about victims. It's one side of the death penalty story, surely, but one that crucially implicates all Americans in continuing to allow this injustice.

"I'm angry," says Rose De Luna, the sister of the wrongly-executed Hector De Luna. "Stay that way," Pickett says.

We all need to get angry.

If you don't get a chance to see it at SXSW, the film will be on IFC in May, and perhaps at Rooftop some time soon. I would love the honor to show this to people, and sure wish that a few of them might be on the Supreme Court.

Here at Rooftop Films, we're thrilled to collaborate with IFC.com to host short films on their website. We've always wanted to put shorts online, and IFC was the perfect platform for the type of creative, unique, daring short films we show, and exposes thousands of new viewers to these distinct movies.

IFC's Media Lab teamed up with Red Bull to create a new web series, and we think they'll come up with some pretty great content. The theme is "After Hours," but they're leaving it pretty open as to what that means to you. Could be late at night, could be after work, could be a universe that operates outside the confines of "hours." One thing they DON'T want is an ad for Red Bull. Make something original, make something cool, make something personal, entertaining and gripping from episode to episode, and you stand a shot. We think the winning entry will be something that will really fit with Rooftop's artistic mission, and that our filmmakers and audience would dig. It's a competition, so I hope all you readers and watchers and filmmakers will enter a chance to get paid to create short films online.

Contest instructions are at www.ifc.com/redbull/

You can enter up till March 31, 2008.

Rooftop alum Casimir Nozkowski has crafted a savvy little promo for the contest all about the nature of internet video. It's a great manifesto. Check it out below.