Film treatment: A Compelling Necessity

Richard K. Moore
Wexford, Ireland
rkm@quaylargo.com
http://escapingthematrix.org
Related blog: rkmvids

Overview
This is a film within a film. The inner film is a standard documentary on the topic of sustainability, with interviews, illustrative footage, a narrator, etc. The outer film is unscripted, and it shows a group of people (a dialog group) who are watching the inner documentary together and pausing it every once in a while to discuss what they’ve seen.

The audience sees the beginning of the inner documentary, expecting that to continue as usual. At some point, the audience is surprised to see a green PAUSE on the screen, and the camera pulls back to show the room with the dialog group, the documentary frame frozen on a wall-mounted screen, while the dialog people begin to share their responses to the first segment of the documentary. When the discussion reaches a natural closure, the camera pulls in to the wall-mounted screen, PAUSE changes to PLAY, and the documentary continues full frame. As the film continues, the dialog scenes continue to interleave from time to time with the documentary.

Why the dialog group?
The relationship of a viewer to a documentary is typically that of an isolated observer. If there is a lot of new and challenging information being presented, the viewer may have difficulty taking it all in and making sense of it. The dialog group is intended to dissolve the sense of isolation, immersing the viewer in a vicarious group discussion, thus facilitating the integration of the material by the viewer.

The dialog group is made up of ordinary people, selected from around the world on the basis of diversity of background, ethnic origin, ideological perspective, etc. In this way, each viewer should be able to identify with one or more of the dialog participants, bringing the viewer into the film, thereby transcending observer isolation. Viewers are likely to see their own responses echoed on the screen, validating their own perceptions, and making them more comfortable with any challenging material in the documentary. As the dialog proceeds, the viewer’s own integration process is likely to be deepened and enriched.

Another typical difficulty with serious documentaries arises from the question, What am I to do with this information? If the documentary portrays a serious problem or crisis, as this one will certainly do, viewers can be left in a state of depression and discouragement, and many people stay away from serious material for that very reason. The dialog group is intended to provide models of how various people deal with the What do I do? question.

The dialog process will be facilitated, using Dynamic Facilitation. (See: Dynamic Facilitation Skills, and Dynamic Facilitation for Group Transformation.) Dynamic Facilitation is a powerful process that enables a group of people to get beyond their differences, and work together creatively to examine and deal with difficult shared problems. The process brings out the inherent wisdom of the group, leading typically to surprising breakthrough solutions to the problems under discussion.

By this means the viewer will be encouraged, seeing that constructive proposals and responses are possible in the face of our environmental crisis. Furthermore, the viewer will see that ordinary people are capable of talking about such issues in a useful way, and capable of coming up with sensible ideas. In this way the viewer is exposed to an experience of democratic empowerment, where ordinary people deal effectively with a difficult issue.

The inner documentary: A Compelling Necessity
The inner documentary is self-standing in its own right, and it deals with the general crisis of unsustainability and environmental degradation, focusing in on food production in particular. By means of interviews and footage taken at various locations around the world, interspersed with interviews with academic experts, the viewer will be introduced to the issues of topsoil loss, desertification, deforestation, declining water tables and fishing stocks, etc.—leading to a realization that humanity is facing a food crisis that makes peak oil and global warming seem like minor problems in comparison.

The documentary goes deeper, showing how these problems are caused / exacerbated by industrial food-production methods that are highly wasteful of water and petroleum resources, and heedless of environmental degradation and health issues. Going still deeper, the documentary explores the political and economic factors driving these food-production methods, showing the effects of privatization, IMF restructuring programs, etc. In particular, the documentary will show how the promotion of biofuels and carbon trading, presumably intended to address peak oil and global warming, are in fact making things worse by taking land out of food production, causing deforestation, and encouraging the continuation of unsustainable infrastructures in the developed world.

But the documentary is not all doom and gloom, far from it. The documentary will also show examples of small-scale, sustainable practices, some in traditional third-world settings, and some in modern settings, where we see what might be characterized as a sustainability movement. Comparisons will be drawn between industrial and sustainable practices, as regards food quality, and as regards productivity per unit of resources expended (land, energy, petroleum-derived products, water, labor, etc.) Special emphasis will be given to the conclusion that sustainable practices are practical and achievable, and they provide real hope for addressing the global food crisis.

Dramatic structure
The documentary will be structured thematically. A theme will be introduced, such as topsoil depletion, and then clips will be shown from the various locations, drawing out the theme and showing how the problem is global in nature. The sequence of themes leads us on a descent into the problems, followed by an ascent into the solution alternatives, providing a journey and resolution similar to that experienced in dramatic film. A parallel journey will be experienced in dialog space, as the group first descends into discussion of the problems, and later ascends into considering the alternatives presented, and develops ideas of its own.

The narrator plays an important role in the documentary, providing continuity, introducing scenes, drawing connections between scenes, etc. Even more important, the narrator needs to lend credibility and authority to the film. The narrator needs to be a known public figure, who appeals to diverse audiences, and who conveys an air of integrity, good sense, and genuine concern for people. In addition, so as to maximize audience size, the narrator needs to be a star figure who can draw audiences on their name alone.

The film opens with the narrator on camera. He or she needs to establish a personal connection with the audience—the narrator, like the outer dialog group, provides an object of identification for the viewer, someone to share the journey with. The introduction to the film and its topics should be short, and designed more to spark curiosity (hook the viewer) than to provide a content preview.

The narrator does not appear on camera again until the final scene of the documentary, when he or she reflects on the material presented and delivers a dramatic and compelling closing speech. The speech (supported by flashbacks to relevant scenes) reiterates the main points made in the film, making them very clear and concrete to the viewer. In particular, three main themes need to be emphasized: the dire urgency of the food crisis, the availability of practical solutions, and the fact that our economic systems and governmental policies are rapidly making the crisis worse.

As the credits begin to role on the documentary, PAUSE appears, and the camera pulls back to the dialog group, for the final sequence of dialog scenes. In studio time, this is likely to be a very long sequence, some number of days, as the full synergy and wisdom of the group is drawn out via Dynamic Facilitation. In viewer time, this dramatic sequence will be highly abbreviated, but care will be taken to convey the emotional and interpersonal aspects of the dialog, as well as the progress made in terms of dealing with the issues and generating useful ideas.

The sequence will be edited so as to lead up to a second natural dramatic conclusion. Just when that point is reached, a PAUSE appears on the screen, and the camera pulls back to show us a studio with the narrator, director, and facilitator watching the final dialog sequence on their screen. The narrator and director will have just seen the dialog group for the first time, and the ensuing conversation will be unscripted.

They will have a short checklist of items that need to be discussed at some point, but they will be encouraged to follow their own natural flow of conversation and talk about whatever interests them as well. There will be no hurry, as the scene will be edited down to the most useful bits. The checklist is yet to be determined, but it will provide an opportunity for the facilitator to explain about ‘process’, the role of a facilitator, the kind of results that can be achieved with groups, and the conditions that are required to achieve those results. There will also be opportunities for everyone to talk about their experiences in making the film, and their feelings about the subject matter and the outcomes of the dialog.

This final scene provides a closure for the audience, and brings together all the elements and levels of the film in a way that viewers can identify with. The scene is edited to lead up to a third ‘natural dramatic conclusion’, and then the credits role. The credits are divided into two sections, presented in different styles, the first for the documentary, and second for the dialog sequences. On each side of the rolling credits are two fixed mini-frames (four in all) where flashbacks are being shown, with the sound track and motion migrating from frame to frame, while the other frames hold stills until their turn comes. Documentary scenes accompany the documentary credits, while dialog scenes accompany the dialog credits. When the credits are finished, we flash to a very brief full-screen reprise of the most compelling moment of the film, whatever that turns out to be. Then fade to black and theater lights up.

Key personnel
Rosa Zubizarreta: Facilitator
This section is to be written by Rosa. It needs to present her (excellent) credentials as a facilitator, and it needs to convey an understanding of what can be expected from the dialog sequences, based on her extensive professional experience. In addition, it needs to explain her role in the production, which will include a primary role in selecting the dialog participants and specifying requirements for the dialog studio, in addition to facilitating the dialog. She will also participate in the editing of the dialog sequences, and she will recruit assistant facilitators if those would be useful.

Richard Moore: Director
I don't have any experience as a director, but I know what I want in the film. As the film will be mostly inteviews and field footage, I don't see any insurmountable problems for me in this role. Meanwhile, I'm experimenting with the visual medium online: rkmvids

TBD: Producer

Project plan
My vision for this film is that it be produced and promoted in the way feature films are produced and promoted, rather than in the way documentaries are typically handled. Rather than seeking funding from the likes of BBC or PBS, my intention is to secure funding from private investors who are committed to the project based on their belief in the importance of the material, and their assessment that the film will do well commercially in theaters. In this way the budget will be adequate to accommodate the many shooting locations, retain a first-rate production team, and enable an effective pre-release promotional campaign.

In order to realize this vision, my first objective is to recruit an appropriate narrator / star and a well-known and experienced film producer—both of whom are committed to the project on the basis of its importance and success potential. The recruitment of investors will then be enabled by the reputation and contacts of these two key individuals, and will be the responsibility of the producer.

Marketing observations
The marketplace for documentaries was greatly expanded by Michael Moore, and expanded still further by Al Gore. Mass audiences now understand that serious documentaries can provide a worthwhile theater experience, and distributors know that this audience exists. It is these observations (together with my faith in the project concept) that lead me to believe that the project plan is viable.