Seventh Row

A place to think deeply about movies

Film Interviews

Interviews with female directors / Index of Interviews

Here you will find all of our interviews with film directors, actors, cinematographers, and more.

/

TIFF15: Jennifer Peedom discusses her Everest doc Sherpa

Jennifer Peedom discusses the making of her terrific new film, the Everest doc, Sherpa, the first documentary to be told from the Sherpa’s perspective.

Read our review of the film here.

Sherpa, Jennifer Peedom
Jennifer Peedom on her Everest doc, Sherpa. Courtesy of TIFF.

Never miss a great film again. Get exclusive content and hidden-gem recommendations you won’t find on the website.

Click here to sign up for the Seventh Row Newsletter.

“I was just amazed at the extent to which the Sherpas do everything and the amount to which that is edited all out of so many Everest films,” said Jennifer Peedom, director of the terrific climbing documentary Sherpa. Although there have been numerous films about climbing Everest — from Leanne Pooley’s 2011 documentary retelling of Edmund Hillary’s ascent, Beyond the Edge, to Baltasar Kormákur’s recent fictional thriller Everest — they tend to be told from the perspective of the foreigners who have travelled to Nepal to climb the world’s tallest mountain. Yet all of these trailblazers required the help of Sherpas to get supplies up the mountains. “No-one had ever told the Sherpas’ side of the story before,” Peedom noted.

Peedom has watched first-hand as the Sherpas’ stories got left on the cutting room floor. In the last ten years, she’s shot three other films on Everest: Miracle on Everest, the Discovery Channel’s six-part series Everest: Beyond Limits, and a 2004 short film for SBS called The Sherpas’ Burden. “I realized that my body worked quite well at altitude,” said Peedom, “so I started to get offered these other jobs.” For each of these films, she climbed with the same team of Sherpas, whom she came to know and respect on a personal level. Over the years, they stayed in touch. “The reason I had the access [to the Sherpas] was that decade of that relationship,” Peedom explained. Peedom even named her daughter after Phurba Tashi Sherpa, the film’s main subject.

The film follows Phurba Tashi, the Sherpa climbing team leader who works for New Zealander expedition leader Russell Brice, both of whom Peedom knew before production began. “I heard about Russell canceling the expedition in 2012 because the Sherpas – he was concerned for the Sherpas’ safety. I thought, ‘Okay, maybe now is the time to make that film.’ And by the time we got around to making it, it was just that other big fight had happened between the foreigners and the Sherpas, and it was just definitely the right time to tell that story.”

[quote type = center]No-one had ever told the Sherpas’ side of the story before.[/quote]

Events would prove Peedom correct. In April 2014, after Peedom’s team had spent only a week at base camp, an unexpected avalanche killed 16 Sherpas. The remaining Sherpas began to organize and decided to cancel the season both out of respect for their lost cohort and as a protest against poor, unsafe working conditions on Everest. The foreign tourists reacted less gracefully to the chaos, often saying horrifying and revealingly colonialist things about the Sherpas’ refusal to climb. Sherpa documents this critical moment when the Sherpas finally began to demand their rights at the expense of disrupting the climbing season — and their own income that year.

Peedom had to figure out how to capture this unfolding drama on the fly. Sherpa was filmed by three cinematographers —  Renan Ozturk who starred in and co-shot Meru, Hugh Miller who captured the action at base camp, and Ken Sauls — as well as Peedom and a Sherpa cameraman, none of whom were in the same location. When the Sherpas began to organize, Peedom sent her Sherpa cameraman to film a private Sherpa meeting with an iPhone, while Peedom herself captured the meetings that occurred between the foreigners and their guides.

To keep the team on the same page, Peedom would “endlessly talk about the story, what it is that we’re trying to say, and what we’re trying to capture, such that when they find themselves without me, with no director, they instinctively know what it is they need to do. It was just about imbuing them deeply with a sense of ‘Okay, this has changed, how has it affected our story? Here’s what I’m thinking.’ ” For example, Ozturk, who was responsible for shooting Brice’s clients as they acclimatized to the high altitude at base camp, “was able to shoot and cover those scenes without a director, because he knew it was important how the clients were responding to the news of the cancellation, because there’s this tension between the foreigners and the Sherpas.”

Peedom recalls capturing the foreigners’ reactions on film: “Some of the exact words that came out of some of those mouths I found shocking. But I always knew, having been on a couple of Everest expeditions before, that foreigners — and I don’t say this in a judgmental way – you’re in a bubble of this mission to climb this mountain. You’ve paid a lot of money. You’ve taken time off work. You’re away from your family. When things get in the way of that, it can be very frustrating. Different people, as you saw in the film, deal with that differently. I think all of the foreigners found it confronting, and a difficult situation to be in, and mixed with sadness and disappointment.”

Making Sherpa was important to Peedom because, she explained, “I’d been on these trips, and I’d seen the guys that had climbed Everest. I’d watched them behaving badly on summit day, and needing to be rescued, and all this stuff. Then, they get down there and forget all about that really quickly. They go and write their books and do their public speaking tours. They forget all about who it was that helped them. They don’t even bother to find out about those people and their families. The Sherpas are risking their lives for these guys, and I just found that it stuck in my craw every time.”

The film opens by introducing us to the Sherpa culture, which will be eye-opening even for climbing doc aficionados. Although many Sherpas now depend on the Everest tourism industry for their livelihoods, the mountain holds a special place in their religion. One of Peedom’s goals for the film was to allow her audience “to see that world in a different way, to try and appreciate the beauty and spirituality and what it means to [the Sherpas] on a whole other level than just a place of economics, a place to earn an income. And that meant meeting their wives and their children and their families, and really just taking us deeply into their world in not a superficial way, as much as you can.”

Peedom elaborated, “The very beginning – it’s like a time lapse. It was about setting the scene and creating a mood. There’s three or four shots, and then we go into the praying and the mantras in the night. I love that scene, I find it very moody and it was about throwing you straight in to create atmosphere and I think it’s about starting wide and then going in quite quickly into the macro details of smoke and praying and throwing rice and these rituals the Sherpas go through when they have to do this terrifying job — which they have to do thirty times.”

[quote type = center]”That world has a very different pace from the world of the foreigner who comes charging in and wants to climb the mountain and then jumps on a chopper.” – Jennifer Peedom [/quote]

“That world has a very different pace from the world of the foreigner who comes charging in and wants to climb the mountain and then jumps on a chopper,” noted Peedom. One way that Peedom evoked this pace of life was to literally slow down some of the images in the film by using slow motion footage. “It was always the intention to slow things down and see the world in a different way to what other Everest films have done,” explained Peedom. “That was very deliberate. It was about capturing that world in a different way and looking at the details of it, the significant details of the Sherpas — the red and the spinning prayer wheels, those details that make up that richly-textured Sherpa world.” She continued, “it was about creating poetry within those shots.”

Ozturk shot most of the slow-motion scenes using a special “gyro-stabilized” device made by Movi Free Fly Systems that allows him to film a steady image while running. “Because you can’t take dollies and traps [on a mountain], we used this Movi a lot. It gives you the ability to track with people and create really amazing production values,” said Peedom.

“That shot where the twins are running out of the house? [Ozturk] was sprinting, absolutely sprinting alongside of them and holding the camera in one hand, and [the Movi] keeps the shot stable. That’s how we did all the aerials. The yak hooves running in slow motion – that’s all on this Movi.” Ozturk “lived in Nepal and speaks fluent Nepali. So he really deeply understood that world and cared about it deeply. I think he put extra effort into really making art out of those shots, and the film is really lifted because of that,” explained Peedom.

[quote type = center]”We wanted really high production values, as well. We wanted this to feel like a movie.”- Jennifer Peedom[/quote]

“We wanted really high production values, as well. We wanted this to feel like a movie.” This focus on production values extended to the sound design by Sam Petty. Petty decided to actually go to Everest to record sounds on the ground. Peedom elaborated, “Sam made the effort to come all the way to base camp. He did a lot of work to understand what it needed to sound like and that paid off in the sound design and mix. It’s a very well-researched sound palette. He went off into the ice, and recorded the ice, and the sounds hitting the ice.”

That attention to detail, especially in the sound, really pays off: the film is more transporting than any other Everest film I’ve seen. And it finally gives the Sherpas the due they deserve.

Jennifer Peedom’s Sherpa had its Canadian Premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival, where this interview took place.

Read more: Review: Jennifer Peedom’s Sherpa is an inside look at the Nepalese people who make climbing Mount Everest possible >>

In Their Own Words: Documentary Masters Vol. 1

We drop you into the minds of some of today’s most influential documentarians, each with very different approaches, to question whether there’s any “right way” to make documentaries.

In Their Own Words: Documentary Masters Vol. 1

/

TIFF15: Leanne Pooley discusses her animated war doc 25 April

25 April
Still from 25 April, courtesy of TIFF.

Leanne Pooley’s boundary-pushing animated documentary 25 April follows six New Zealanders’ experiences during the World War I Battle of Gallipoli in 1915. The battle was an important part of New Zealand history because of how poorly the British treated their colonial forces: underquipped, under-supported troops were deployed in Turkey for what ended up being a pointless bloodbath. Each character tells his or her story in an animated talking head interview — created using motion capture with live actors —  set around 1920. The stories  are then brought to life with recreated footage of the events.

When Pooley was brought onto the project, her producer had already decided to make the film using animation. After ten months of research, poring over hundreds of journals and letters from the time with her team of researchers, Pooley identified six characters with distinctive voices who could help tell the story of the events — one of whom had been at Gallipoli at the very beginning and the end of the campaign.

In their initial promotional trailer for the film to seek funding, the interviews were set in present day, because that’s how we think of war documentaries: old people recounting stories from decades past. But because this film would be animated, Pooley had a radical idea: why not set it just after the war, when the characters were still young and close to the story? It’s something that wouldn’t be possible in conventional documentary filmmaking, and it dovetailed nicely with Pooley’s goal to connect with young people in New Zealand who have been moved to commemorate this battle in recent years.

25 April had its world premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival earlier this month. I sat down with Leanne Pooley to discuss the challenges of making the film, how she decided to use actual actors with motion capture for the talking head interviews, and why making an animated documentary was a good match for the material.

Seventh Row (7R): The animation in the film is very stylized. How did that particular style come about, and what the process was to find it?

Leanne Pooley (LP): It’s a multi stage process. At the beginning, I said I wanted it to have a graphic novel feel, not like a game, which I told the animation team. Then the team comes to the table with their ideas. There’s also budgetary issues to talk about — the backgrounds are hand drawn, but the characters were computer generated. When we made the decision to go with a graphic novel aesthetic, we had Colin Wilson, who’s a really well known graphic novelist. He did all the character’s faces. He gave them a really “drawn” feel. I wanted to make them look animated, not real.

7R: What do you think a documentary film, and also animation, can do for this story that a narrative film couldn’t do?

LP: Animation is great because it can put you inside the heads of the characters in ways that would look kind of naff in live action. You can create visual metaphors you’d never be able to get away with  in live action. You get the freedom to play with imagery and metaphor, and being inside the experience of the characters.

In terms of documentary versus fiction, there’s something about documentary that makes an audience feel comfortable knowing that there’s some truth in what’s happening. You look at “Braveheart,” which I think is a genius piece of filmmaking, but then there’s people talking about how it’s not historically accurate, which some people find it gets in the way of their viewing experience.

If you use the documentary word, you hope your audience has relaxed into the sense that this happened. That’s why we put the key up at the front of the film saying it’s true. We did a test audience, and one member of it said, “It’s a bit cliché that you had the Maori unit doing a haka,” but that’s what happened. Maybe it’s cliché that they did a haka, but they did a haka.. I think there’s a comfort in knowing that if you’re using the documentary word, knowing there’s fact.

7R: How did you think about structure when writing the script?

LP: I do set down a breakdown of the “beats” I want to hit. I look at them and think, “There’s an awful lot of darkness, we need some lightness.” We have a scene where there’s the armistice, and it’s pretty horrible and sad, and I go to the swimming to give the audience a breath before we go back to death and despair. I think that’s the same. I sit down and write what my scenes are and their order. I look for “This character’s disappeared for half an hour, we can’t have that,” like traditional film. I sit down and mark it out.

25 April
Courtesy of TIFF.

7R: How do you decide which animated scenes you need to create? You have an idea of what people will be talking about, but you don’t know until you’re cutting it all together…

LP: It’s a good question, because you don’t want to throw stuff away either, because it’s so expensive. We did throw some stuff away, like how some people shoot car chases and throw them away. We did an Animatic, using storyboards. Before we started any animation, we storyboarded every frame. We tried to do some editing in the storyboard stage, so we don’t waste time animating.  We made about four to five minutes’ worth of animation we didn’t use, but not masses, because we’d done a very specific storyboard.

7R: I think there’s a lot of interesting ‘daily life’ details in the trenches. The buzzing of the bugs, or the sense of camaraderie, and what they were doing. I imagine a lot of that came out of research?

LP: Photographs, too. Animators would look at photographs of how the trenches looked, how the men dressed, what the food set-up looked like, lots of referencing photographs. Thankfully, there were a lot of photographs, so we could reference them. So, you know, the fact that lots of them wore singlets, and were sweaty and dirty. The images inside the hospital ship, that was taken completely referencing photographs. We even found things that were thought were interesting that we just put in the background. We could play a little bit.

7R: How did you decide to do the motion capture for the interviews as opposed to just animating?

LP: It just seemed to make sense. I needed the voices, so we might as well. It was a bit of a staged thing — I actually shot the interviews without the motion capture first, so that we could cut. I had like six hours of interview, and then I wove it like I was making a traditional documentary. I did an awful lot more interviewing than I used. So then when we redid it with motion capture, they didn’t have to do the whole interview. It had always been the way we thought they’d do it. I wanted the emotions to be coming from somebody who was experiencing what was happening, rather than just me adding stuff to an animated face. I hope people connect to the characters because of that.

7R: This is not the first time you’ve worked with actors. Actors aren’t often associated with documentary filmmaking, so have you worked with actors in other projects, or do you just learn as you do in a non-fiction environment?

LP: I’ve worked with actors quite a few times in documentary, done a lot of documentary/narrative crossover. I also go to a lot of actors studio workshops to make sure I keep that skill. I just make sure I have the best cast possible, to save me if I get it wrong. On this film, I worked with six of the best actors in New Zealand — wonderful actors who are experienced. If you can get the casting right, I then just work to have a relationship with them.

They spent quite a lot of time to just get to know the characters they were playing. It was easier than with some films, because they were real people — a lot of background stuff was provided. I love working with actors. The joy of working with actors is in documentary, when you’re working with real people, you’re just waiting for something to happen. With actors, I can just say, “This is what’s going to happen”.

7R: What made you decide this the best way to tell this story in this documentary — what conventions to keep and what to change?

LP: I decided early on that I would have talking heads. Because it was a departure to go into animation, I wanted there to be recognizable documentary elements, to give the audience an orienting point. I wanted it to be an animated documentary, not just an animated movie. I didn’t want to have dialogue in the war scenes. I wanted you to see the characters speaking, so you could connect with them as individuals. I’m not afraid of talking heads if you can ensure that what you’re seeing is something of someone’s soul, which is another reason I wanted to use motion capture. If I hadn’t used motion capture, I don’t think it would have worked.

7R: I find it interesting that you do make documentaries, but you do a lot of things that we associate with narrative film, with actors and animation. The form is very malleable…

LP: I think it should be. Documentary doesn’t have to be just pointing the camera and wait for something interesting to happen. I’ve been around a long time, so I’m looking for ways to push and scare and excite myself. It’s partly that. Also, I don’t think there’s much of a difference between good documentary and fiction filmmaking. Good documentaries should have characters people identify with, a first act turning point, a climax, changes in pace, a little bit of humour. Good documentary filmmaking should have all those things just like any film should.

7R: What do you think documentary film is? Because you do interesting things with form, that are sort of unexpected and innovative. I was wondering where you see what documentary and non-fiction are?

25 April
Courtesy of TIFF.

LP: What attracts me to projects is to play with the form. I’ve made a lot of traditional documentaries, more than I want to admit, because I’ve been around for a long time. I say I need a character to walk from A to B, and my animation director would say, “Where’s he coming from? Is he tired, is he injured?” It’s just like working with actors: you want the characters to move in a way that’s motivated and truthful. There were always endless questions about the scene, and what you’d be doing in the scene. That was a real learning curve with me. Animators think like actors. You’re looking for little moments that add to a moment, integrating the how  of an action, too. That has to be really thought through from a performance perspective. It’s something I really had to think about.

7R: How does experience with having done so many other documentaries help you deal with this form crossover?

LP: Partly because I have a group of people I’ve worked with a lot, we literally dive into the trench together. Partly because I think I have a good understanding of pace, I try keep my films from being too long. I think many documentaries are too long. This film’s only 85 minutes, which is short as you can be and still be a feature film. I’m unusual in that I try to keep my films tight. That’s also experience, and watching 10,000 documentaries in my life and deciding that most of them are too long. I guess there’s a little bit of confidence that you’ve done stuff so you trust yourself. Usually I’m just terrified like everyone else. Terror is the place I start with.

This is an excerpt. Read the full interview in our ebook on creative nonfiction…

Explore the spectrum between fiction and nonfiction

Subjective realities: The art of creative nonfiction is a tour through contemporary creative nonfiction, aka hybrid or experimental documentaries. Discover films that push the boundaries of the documentary form.

Download a FREE excerpt from the book