Written By February/March 2011 : Page 24

To Tell The TruTh Recognizing the voices of reality. Written by Melissa GaGe T he writers of this year’s Documentary Screenplay Award nominees have diverse backgrounds, includ-ing theater, investigative journalism, primetime television, and features. In other words, they know story. These documentaries manage to be both informative and entertaining—no easy feat with such scintillat-ing subject matter as collateralized debt obligation and ethylbenzene. enemies of the People Written by rob Lemkin and thet Sambath Thet Sambath wants answers: Why were so many Cambo-dians slaughtered during the Khmer Rouge regime’s brutal reign from 1975 to 1979? Ten years in the making, this groundbreaking documentary, co-written by Rob Lemkin, shatters the 30-year silence of those directly involved with the mass murders, from the foot soldiers up to the master-mind, Nuon Chea. This is anything but a history lesson. Enemies of the People is the powerful story of Sambath’s personal quest to find out why his father, brother, and mother died at the hands of the Khmer Rouge. An investigative reporter by day, Sambath spent every weekend for a decade traveling to the provinces for research, a journey that took both a finan-cial and emotional toll on his family. “I couldn’t allow this hidden history to remain unknown,” Sambath says. As an audience, we experience the his-torical story through Sambath’s especially charged point of view. Lemkin references Shakespeare’s drama-tizations of history, explaining that “the history’s right in there, but the characters are everything.” He adds, “Everything has a dramatic purpose.” What makes the story emotionally complex is that Sam-bath befriends both the killers and Nuon Chea to win their trust and uncover the truth. Only after years of friendly vis-24 • WGA W Written By FEBRUARY/MARCH 2011 its does he even mention the Khmer Rouge. His subjects have no idea that his family fell victim to the regime. The riveting build to Sambath’s reveal infuses the narrative with tension and suspense. In the film’s most chilling scene, Sambath convinces one of the killers to demonstrate with a plastic knife how he sliced the throats of his victims. The sheepish killer refuses to demonstrate on Sambath, but the subtext is palpable as he watches the reenactment on another man. The narrative is equally driven by the race to extract the truth before the looming U.N. arrest of Nuon Chea. A classically trained storyteller well-versed in Aristotle’s Poetics, Lemkin structured the narrative around a climac-tic “reversal of fortune” and a “move from ignorance to knowledge and recognition.” Lemkin explains: “The main arc of the story was to take Nuon Chea from being the all-powerful, former dictator, untouched and unruffled by his crimes of 30 years ago … to prison, from which he’s never going to emerge.” Just before Nuon Chea is arrested, Sambath reveals the truth about his family. For the first time, the former dicta-tor expresses genuine remorse, responding, “I would like to say how deeply sorry I am.” But Sambath’s catharsis is complicated. As he watches Nuon Chea being hauled off in a helicopter, he admits to feeling sad. It would have been easy for the writers to vilify the film’s killers, but instead they’re portrayed as remorseful old men who are haunted by their horrific acts. Sambath recognizes that, “In daring to confess, they have done good, perhaps the only good thing left. They, and all the killers like them, must be part of the process of reconciliation if my country is to move forward.” Freedom riders Written by Stanley nelson Most of us are familiar with the story of the Freedom Rides of 1961—or think we are. Undeterred by horrific mob vio-

To Tell The Truth

Melissa Gage

The writers of this year’s Documentary Screenplay Award nominees have diverse backgrounds, including theater, investigative journalism, primetime television, and features. In other words, they know story. These documentaries manage to be both informative and entertaining—no easy feat with such scintillating subject matter as collateralized debt obligation and ethylbenzene. enemies of the People Written by rob Lemkin and thet Sambath Thet Sambath wants answers: Why were so many Cambodians slaughtered during the Khmer Rouge regime’s brutal reign from 1975 to 1979? Ten years in the making, this groundbreaking documentary, co-written by Rob Lemkin, shatters the 30-year silence of those directly involved with the mass murders, from the foot soldiers up to the mastermind, Nuon Chea. This is anything but a history lesson. Enemies of the People is the powerful story of Sambath’s personal quest to find out why his father, brother, and mother died at the hands of the Khmer Rouge. An investigative reporter by day, Sambath spent every weekend for a decade traveling to the provinces for research, a journey that took both a financial and emotional toll on his family. “I couldn’t allow this hidden history to remain unknown,” Sambath says. As an audience, we experience the historical story through Sambath’s especially charged point of view. Lemkin references Shakespeare’s dramatizations of history, explaining that “the history’s right in there, but the characters are everything.” He adds, “Everything has a dramatic purpose.” What makes the story emotionally complex is that Sambath befriends both the killers and Nuon Chea to win their trust and uncover the truth. Only after years of friendly visits does he even mention the Khmer Rouge. His subjects have no idea that his family fell victim to the regime. The riveting build to Sambath’s reveal infuses the narrative with tension and suspense. In the film’s most chilling scene, Sambath convinces one of the killers to demonstrate with a plastic knife how he sliced the throats of his victims. The sheepish killer refuses to demonstrate on Sambath, but the subtext is palpable as he watches the reenactment on another man. The narrative is equally driven by the race to extract the truth before the looming U.N. arrest of Nuon Chea. A classically trained storyteller well-versed in Aristotle’s Poetics, Lemkin structured the narrative around a climactic “reversal of fortune” and a “move from ignorance to knowledge and recognition.” Lemkin explains: “The main arc of the story was to take Nuon Chea from being the allpowerful, former dictator, untouched and unruffled by his crimes of 30 years ago … to prison, from which he’s never going to emerge.” Just before Nuon Chea is arrested, Sambath reveals the truth about his family. For the first time, the former dictator expresses genuine remorse, responding, “I would like to say how deeply sorry I am.” But Sambath’s catharsis is complicated. As he watches Nuon Chea being hauled off in a helicopter, he admits to feeling sad. It would have been easy for the writers to vilify the film’s killers, but instead they’re portrayed as remorseful old men who are haunted by their horrific acts. Sambath recognizes that, “In daring to confess, they have done good, perhaps the only good thing left. They, and all the killers like them, must be part of the process of reconciliation if my country is to move forward.” Freedom riders Written by Stanley nelson Most of us are familiar with the story of the Freedom Rides of 1961—or think we are. Undeterred by horrific mob vioLence, imprisonment, and death threats, a courageous group of black and white college students challenged segregation by traveling together on buses through the Deep South, ultimately leading to one of the first real victories of the civil rights movement. But the story didn’t end there. Stanley Nelson’s Freedom Riders tells a saga most didn’t know—a nuanced, behind-the-scenes account as emotional as it is surprising. In crafting the story, Nelson faced several challenges. Based in part on Raymond Arsenault’s 700-page tome, Freedom Riders: 1961 and the Struggle for Racial Justice, his first task was to “boil it down to its essence and make it into a story that still has emotional resonance.” That meant forgoing narration, a difficult creative decision Nelson made because he believes “first-person storytelling connects better with an audience and feels more authentic and in the moment.” Avoiding repetition was another big challenge. “It was easy to see [the events] as a series of confrontations and beatings that were all very similar,” he says. “How to make each one different was one of the tasks … so each has its own narrative push.” Finally, there was the problem of predictability. We all know how the story of the civil rights movement ends, yet the narrative inspires us to cheer on the Freedom Riders when they set out, experience their terror when they’re attacked, feel disappointment when they face defeat, and triumph when they ultimately prevail. According to Nelson, “We were trying to set up a situation where nothing is inevitable. All the forces are against you. The forces that we think of being on your side are not yet on your side.” And therein lies one of the film’s most powerful revelations. Nelson’s balanced narrative includes characters from Alabama’s obstinate governor to horrified bystanders who witnessed the beatings. But the roles that many highprofile figures play will surprise you. In revealing portrayals, Martin Luther King, President John Kennedy, and Attorney General Robert Kennedy are shown to be tentative in their support of the Freedom Riders. Including such unpleasant facts was a crucial creative decision, Nelson explains: “We’re taught that Martin Luther King, John Kennedy, and Bobby Kennedy are these great heroes who emerged fully formed, but it’s important that we look at them as human beings who developed. And part of the reason they developed was that they were forced to develop by events such as the Freedom Rides.” Seeing these prominent figures in the context of a specific historic event brings depth and meaning to Nelson’s narrative. In perhaps the film’s most prophetic moment, Robert Kennedy finally speaks out in support of civil rights, declaring that “in the near or foreseeable future, a Negro could be president of the United States.” Gasland Written by Josh Fox An entertaining film about hydraulic fracturing? Absolutely. In his first documentary film, theater director– playwright Josh Fox tells the story of the largest natural gas–drilling boom in U. S. history—and the horrific health and environmental consequences caused by the resulting water contamination. The personal tale is described as “part vérité travelogue, part exposé, part mystery, part bluegrass banjo meltdown, part showdown.” We couldn’t have said it better ourselves. Fox describes Gasland as “a cross between The Wizard of Oz and a detective story”—a road movie with a mystery element. According to the filmmaker, the narrative question asks, “Who is the man behind the curtain?” Fox is initially seen contemplating a $100,000 offer to drill on the idyllic land where he was raised. From his back porch, the journey of discovery takes Fox throughout the country, collecting water samples, lighting tap water on fire, and digging for answers until he ultimately lands in the halls of Congress. As the protagonist of the film, Fox plays the role of a banjo-plucking amateur detective, narrating his journey with what he calls a “dry, Humphrey Bogart impression,” which also brings to mind Hunter S. Thompson. Fox admits to feeling like “Alan Lomax compiling all these stories across America.” He’s not afraid to use the occasional banjo interlude to “evoke the tradition of American folk tales.” In crafting the story, Fox says, “the most important discovery was the tone. We never wanted to be sarcastic, we never wanted to be condescending, and we never wanted to tell people what to think, but I had to make it funny.” In his voiceover, Fox sought to uphold the tone set by the film’s fantastic characters, simultaneously poignant and hilarious. “I had to respond in kind—I had to do things that were equally poetic and humorous.” Structurally, one of the biggest challenges was balancing the science, politics, and human stories. Fox’s strategy was to “frame each episode as its own little arc, which adds up to the bigger arc,” he says. “I tried to find succinct ways of putting the science part of it, but also to make something alive with a visual, or a metaphor, or a joke.” Perhaps the severest obstacle became time constraints. The film was completed in just nine months, while Fox also opened multiple plays in New York. “There was no time to plan,” he confides. “We had to do this fast if it was going to be relevant.” That meant getting out in front of the scheduled drilling along the Delaware River The result? In November, the New York State assembly approved a temporary fracking moratorium—an important victory in an ongoing struggle that Fox helped bring to light through his entertaining take on a complex and highly emotional topic. inside Job Written by Charles Ferguson; Co-written by Chad Beck and Adam Bolt Charles Ferguson is outraged. And so are most Americans. Together with co-writerseditors Chad Beck and Adam Bolt, Ferguson poses the question on everyone’s mind after the financial meltdown of 2008: What the hell happened? But Inside Job isn’t only an analysis of how the crisis occurred. It’s a passionate investigation into an industry that has corrupted this country from the highest offices of politics to the halls of academia. With a background in economic policy and having written and directed the award-winning investigative documentary No End In Sight, Ferguson felt prepared for such an ambitious subject. After about nine months of research and filming, he handed a detailed outline over to Beck and Bolt. From there, the process became intensely collaborative. According to Bolt, “Charles knew the story he wanted to tell, and the three of us worked together on how to tell it in a cinematic way.” That meant tirelessly structuring, sequencing, refining, and sharpening until the narrative was not only easy to understand but entertaining as well. “I was determined not to make a dull film,” Ferguson says. “[But] making a feature length film about finance interesting and cinematic and accessible was certainly a challenge.” To accomplish such a daunting task, the collaborators dug Deep in their arsenal of storytelling tools, employing a balance of title cards, graphics, voiceover, and music. Pacing was also crucial to keep the audience engaged. Bolt explains: “After a section that was heavy on information and voiceover, it was good to put something that was a little more fun and music-driven, to give the audience a break.” The simple goal, Beck says, was “to make potentially dry subject matter lively and emotional.” Enter Charles Ferguson, interviewer. As facts add up in an easy-to-follow manner, discomfort with the greed, shortsighted agendas, and conflicts of interest that created the meltdown transforms into outrage. Ferguson is mad as hell and he’s not going to take it anymore. He becomes the voice of the average American—only, unlike us, he actually knows what he’s talking about. We feel a little less helpless when he challenges his smug interviewees, interrupting them with evidence: “Forgive me, but that’s clearly not true,” and “Excuse me, but you can’t be serious.” Ferguson explains that the intent was “to show that these people aren’t superhuman, that it’s perfectly possible to challenge them and that, in fact, when actually challenged, their façade often crumbles quickly.” Adds Beck, “It’s great cinema, and it gives the audience a voice. I’ve always considered it essential to the film.” Thanks to a skillfully crafted narrative that manages to simultaneously entertain and infuriate, you don’t have to have an MBA to understand that the financial meltdown of 2008 should have been avoided. the two escobars Written by Michael Zimbalist and Jeff Zimbalist Jeff and Michael Zimbalist’s film about the shocking connection between the murders of Columbian soccer legend Andrés Escobar and notorious drug lord Pablo Escobar was never supposed to be on the big screen. In fact, the original assignment was a one-hour piece investigating who killed Andrés Escobar after he scored on his own team in the 1994 World Cup. But when the brothers uncovered the complex world of “narco soccer” and drew a connection between the Columbian national soccer team and the fate of an entire nation, ESPN gave its blessing for a feature-length theatrical release designed for an audience much wider than sports fans. As the story of The Two Escobars evolved, so did the Zimbalists’ storytelling approach. According to Michael, the Columbian people soon became the protagonist of the film. “The way that they had put their hopes and dreams in this team, as not only a way for the country to transform its image, but also for them to start rebuilding a sense of self-worth and identity, ended up feeling much more potent to us, and more universal,” he explains. The contrasting but intertwined Escobar characters, Michael continues, became “windows into the two sides of the world that we were exploring. Pablo was the window into the social, the narco, and the violent side, and Andrés was the vehicle through which to explore not just the soccer side, but the side of the hardworking, peace-loving people of Columbia.” How did the writers keep the audience engaged throughout the sprawling narrative? “The idea was to create suspense and tension,” Jeff says, “and to keep people involved, and keep the pace of the film moving forward just ahead of the viewer.” To do so, they used a hook at the beginning of the film that features the Columbian soccer team taking the field for the fateful World Cup game after receiving death threats at their hotel. From there, the tension builds steadily until the inevitable climax of the film. The seamless skill with which this complex, multilayered story builds upon itself is a testament to the Zimbalists’ stellar storytelling skills. It doesn’t hurt that they have complimenting areas of expertise. According to Jeff, “Mike comes from a theater background and has been writing fiction For a long time as well, so he’s got a really good grasp of story structure and what works; I come more from an editing background. So when Mike is looking at the big picture and figuring out where movement and sequences should start and end, I’m working a little more granularly on piecing together the pacing and the voice and the rhythm of certain sections.” The result of their joint effort is an emotional roller coaster that builds like a thriller, moves like an action movie, and ultimately breaks your heart as tragedy. Who is Harry nilsson (And Why is everybody talkin’ About Him)? Written by John Scheinfeld There’s plenty to talk about when it comes to Harry Nilsson. In John Scheinfeld’s heartfelt, and often humorous, documentary, the gifted artist is described by those who knew him best as “a fallen angel,” “the best singer of a generation,” “an agent provocateur,” “an American version of the Beatles,” “his own worst enemy,” and “a big bunny with really sharp teeth.” But this is no Behind the Music–styled exposé. Dubbed “close to genius” by Stephen King, Scheinfeld’s intimate narrative presents a layered portrait of an incredibly complex character. Scheinfeld likens the process of writing a documentary film to putting together a jigsaw puzzle. “I could fit the pieces together 10 ways, 50 ways, a hundred ways, and as the writer I’m saying, ‘How can I put all of these pieces together in an interesting way that’s going to move people?’ It’s how the pieces fit together that will engage the audience or not.” With Scheinfeld’s background in Prime time television, it’s no surprise that he’s a stickler for structure. After compiling his research, he lays out the entire story in a traditional three-act narrative. The disciplined writer believes that the “idea of going into an editing room and just finding your story is, to me, very irresponsible. I won’t start until there’s a script.” In the case of Who is Harry Nilsson, many of the puzzle pieces were Nilsson’s recordings—61 tracks in all. Using music to drive the story is signature Scheinfeld. He believes that it can “enrich the overall experience of storytelling in a way that nothing else can.” Specifically, Scheinfeld uses lyrics “to advance the story, or to comment on action that’s been happening on screen, or to give us a window into what the subject may have been thinking or feeling at a particular time.” Combined with the interviews, the music allows us to hear Nilsson’s story through his own words, rather than those of a narrator. So when the film touches on Nilsson’s friendship with Ringo Starr, we hear the lyrics, “People let me tell you about my best friend,” and when Nilsson endured a divorce, we hear, “You’re breaking my heart, you’re tearing it apart, so fuck you …” Maintaining a balance between the “good Harry,” a devoted family man, and the “bad Harry,” a drug and alcohol abuser, was Scheinfeld’s crucial challenge. “I didn’t want to give undue emphasis to the dark side, but I didn’t want to shy away from it either … I wanted to tell the truth.”

Previous Page Next Page

Publication List
Using a screen reader? Click Here