ITVS’s Kate Sullivan Green had the opportunity to sit down with Theresa and talk about making her first film, the ups and downs of documenting a family member, and what she learned about the challenges so many Chinese faced immigrating to America.

Every Day Is a Holiday airs Sunday, May 27 at 2:30 p.m. on THIRTEEN.

Interview courtesy of ITVS.

What stood out to you about your dad while making Every Day Is a Holiday?

His fierce, fierce, fierce determination.  I always had a sense he had a really interesting life, but one of the things I’ve taken away is how much struggle he went through to become a citizen.  That gives me more appreciation for him and for people in general who go through hardship.  I consider myself an empathetic person, but this really puts things in perspective when I am feeling down.  I have a deep respect for what he went through.

One other thing is that I didn’t realize how difficult it would be for him to relive the past.  I guess I thought he was ready to share his story, but there were times when he would say, “Oh, that’s enough” or get up and walk away.  Sometimes it was just because he was tired, but other times I’d see his eyes go to a far away place as he was actually reliving the moment.  Especially with first person narrative, we have to balance wanting to know history with sensitivity.

Does he like the film?

I was afraid to show him for a long time.  When he finally saw a fine cut of it, he laughed about certain things – nodding and laughing.  After one screening he said, “It’s the truth.”  I couldn’t quite figure it out, it seems like veiled praise, but yeah, I think he likes it.

Your dad’s story is inspiring on so many levels as we see his perseverance, charisma, optimism, and ultimate success.  More broadly, this is also a story about the immigration system in the United States in the 1940s and 1950s. What’s one particularly interesting thing you learned about while making this film?

I didn’t know much about the Chinese Exclusion Act and the fact is, that after that, from 1943-1965, only 105 Chinese people were allowed to become U.S. citizens, no matter where you lived.  That was a great deterrent to getting to the United States. The Chinese Exclusion act of 1882 halted Chinese immigration and prohibited Chinese from becoming U.S. citizens.  This law was replaced with others barring Chinese immigration, until the Magnuson Act in 1943, which permitted a national quota of only 105 Chinese immigrants per year.   That was finally replaced by the Immigration Act of 1965.

The other takeaway was that during World War II, the Japanese did not sign the Geneva Convention, so even though my dad had some Red Cross packages at the camp, there were a bunch of packages they were not able to distribute.  They did have a Red Cross person visit once, but it was only meant to seem very nice.  I show those propaganda photos in the film.  

What do you hope viewers takeaway after watching?

One is to gain a greater appreciation from people who may look a certain way in everyday life.  My dad could be seen as some older fellow, a non-descript Asian guy, but if one is to perhaps take the time to listen and ask, who knows what kind of stories they have.  It can be an enlightening thing to do.

I also hope people see that Chinese-American or Asian-American identity can be complex.  My dad is ethnically Chinese but comes from Malaysia and my mom comes from Taiwan.  In the mass media, we tend to have very stereotypical viewpoints of ethnicities and religion.

The other is for viewers to walk away with a bit more knowledge about the struggle of Asian-Americans and a greater understanding of the history in the far east. It’s a politically charged issue but it’s this idea that, for instance, in Japanese textbooks they downplay the significance of what happened in World War II.  One goal with this film was to open that dialog and explain that these things actually did happen.

I hope people see that this is an American story too.

Do you have any advice for others who are making a film with a parent as the main subject?

One is perseverance and two is sensitivity.  The perseverance is that you want to tell the story, and know you should.  But you have to be sensitive to whatever they are going through, and whether they feel like talking or not.  Remember, first and foremost, that it is a family member and be loyal to that.  It’s perseverance combined with sensitivity.

Maybe three is to learn when to ask for help.  Since things can be extra personal with a family member, if you are going to be protective then you have to find the crew that you trust, or develop the skills to do it yourself.  It was great to have another camera person but it also does change the dynamic, sometimes for the better, but occasionally I would see my dad being more guarded in a moment than if it were only me.

As a new filmmaker, what are some important lessons you learned while making Every Day Is a Holiday?

I didn’t have much of a budget, but I didn’t let not having a skill or saying I cannot afford something stop me.  Money is a factor, but you have to figure out a way.  For instance, I couldn’t really shoot that well, so I learned.  I didn’t have much money for archival footage and research, so I went to the national archives myself.   It was a great chance to learn about how the archives work.  Once I even went with my family and found a board from one of the camps showing what the prisoners were assigned to do.  So I was able to make that part happen.

Another is to prepare and plan as much as possible, even though things crop up unexpectedly.  I don’t always follow this rule, but the more you do the easier it is.

And always follow your curiosity.

Follow the band from their formation through their successful and long-sustained career that has kept them in the spotlight two decades later, featuring over 1,200 hours of rarely and never-before-seen footage, plus over 24 hours of recent band interviews and concert footage.

Enter our giveaway for the chance to win an American Masters: Pearl Jam Twenty prize pack, and read a Q&A with the band from before the launch of the film.

Watch online:

Learn more about the campaign and view previous videos here.

Check out related stories on THIRTEEN’s local news and culture site, MetroFocus.

It’s been a couple of months since Matthew finally popped the question to Lady Mary and the television screen, and our world as we knew it, went dark – so I thought it was time to check back in with all you Downtonians out there. These Crawleyless days have been rather grey, and some Downton Abbey fans have become desperate looking for their fix. So desperate that it’s only the odd bits of Edwardian civilization, added into their modern lives, that has helped many to maintain their sanity. People are naming both sons and dogs Carson; older suburban women, who ordinarily run around dressed in track suits, like Paulie Walnuts, now dress for dinner; silly hats are making a comeback; and chauffers report that they are now getting hit on as much as firefighters. Downton Abbey is more than just a show: It has become phenomenon.

In March, when the White House held a State Dinner in honor of Prime Minister David Cameron, all the press reports said that Lord and Lady Grantham were in attendance. Not Hugh Bonneville and Elizabeth McGovern – but Lord and Lady Grantham. Call me kooky but I’d say this was a missed opportunity: If there’s any Grantham who should have come to Washington, it is the Dowager Countess. Who wouldn’t want to see her address a joint session of Congress and give those knuckleheads a dose of what-for, Dowager Countess-style?

Downton Abbey is the hottest show of the season: Everyone and their brother is touting connections to it, and just about every network has some new show that their publicity departments claim as being The New Downton Abbey. Ovation described their new mini-series, Cloud Street, as ‘The Australian Downton Abbey’. Silly me, I thought The Thorn Birds was the Australian Downton Abbey. But despite that, I watched Cloud Street just to see how like Downton it really is, and I can report that it is nothing like Downton Abbey at all. Try Twin Peaks meets Lost meets Babe. There’s a vaguely haunted house, squirrely neighbors, and a talking pig. I can’t recall any of Mrs. Patmore’s roasts giving their opinion, can you? And actually, if any animal at Downton were to talk, I’d want it to be Isis. A talking Isis would really have some tales to tell. Of course, the first words out of her mouth would be, ‘what is with these crazy, fercoct people?’

Fortunately, PBS understands this beast that they have created (and it’s not like they’re running test patterns in the interim). To help ease Downton withdrawal symptoms for us tea-sipping Anglophiles, THIRTEEN has offered up some fabulous, original British programming. Already, in the Downtonless wilderness, a new star has risen: A tossel-haired and dishy Sherlock Holmes, also known as Benedict Cumberbatch, (distant cousin of Englebert Humperdink?). In the short time we have known him, we have learned two things about him: He doesn’t like people shaking Emmy statues at him (understandable since one of those pointy wings could take someone’s eye out), and he uses words like ‘begone’ (as in ‘begone woman!’). And I have it on good authority that at a recent live PBS appearance in NYC, he turned grown women into a quivering mass of Beliebers.

And talk about burying the lede: Season 2 of Downton Abbey re-airs on THIRTEEN Thursdays at 9pm starting May 17, and it will be LOTS of fun to watch again. Personally, I always love to watch something great another time or two. Knowing how it all turns out, you always end up seeing all kinds of little details and throwaway lines you missed the first time around. And on two of those Thursday nights, THIRTEEN will have pledge breaks during Downton Abbey. If Downtonians go to the phones, THIRTEEN will be quids in for sure!

One of the fun side-effects of a great drama is, it fires our imaginations, and the finely crafted characters it creates keep on living there. Because of that, The End isn’t really the end – you always wonder what happened to the characters after that. So I know that what all you Downtonians will be doing, while watching the Season 2 encore; the same thing we’ve been doing since Season 2 ended: Thinking about what’s going to happen in Season 3. The only hint we have of Season 3 is from Begone Woman, who told the press that ‘Someone is born and someone dies.’ Hmmm… That’s not really a giveaway. It sounds like the story line of any soap season. So let’s break it down and think about what that could mean. And by the way, none of what I’m saying here is a spoiler: It can’t be because I don’t have the slightest idea what happens in season 3. I’m just speculating for fun – so join me!

‘Someone is born and someone dies’: At the end of season two Sybil was pregnant, so it’s not a stretch for it to be her who gives birth. Then again, that’s way too easy. So what if it’s Lady Grantham who falls pregnant again, and what if this time O’Brien keeps her hands off the soap, and Cora gives birth and then dies? Talk about a twofer! And of course, using the British term ‘fall pregnant’ sounds like… well never mind what it sounds like. But if anyone were to fall accidentally anything, it would have to be Edith, wouldn’t it? And when last seen, Edith was dancing with Thomas. But he wouldn’t… would he?

Online there have been message board rumors (for what those are worth) that Dowager Grantham is going to be killed off, but I can’t believe that Lord Fellowes would do anything so dumb as to yank Violet out of the garden show in Season 3 when he’s already said he expects there to be a Season 4. Who would he replace her with, Cousin Oliver? If they ever did kill off the ever-popular Dowager, Downtonians from far and wide would certainly descend upon his house with pitchforks and torches. But say for just a second that it were true, how would she go? What would be an appropriate exit for our Violet? Might she come to a Pamuk-style end? When Lord Hepworth visited, there were hints that, in her youth, she had a wild streak. Who’s to say she doesn’t want another highland fling? But who would be in the role of Lady Mary in this Pamukian scenario? Mosley? (I can just see your faces at that thought!) Then again, given the Dowager’s battles with modernity she could just as easily meet her maker by getting caught in a revolving door.

So many others to speculate about… Will Matthew and Mary get to the alter? Will there be more repercussions over Mrs. Bates’ death? Have we seen the last of Sir Rupert? Will Mr. Bates get out of prison? Will Anna change her name to Tammy Wynette? Come to think of it, is she the one who gives birth? And what kind of hell is going to break loose when Aurora Greenway (AKA Shirley MacLaine) turns up at Downton? So many questions.

It’s elementary my dear Downtonians: The countdown to Season 3 begins! Keep checking back here, Downtonians, as we periodically survey the latest news from Downton Abbey and beyond.

Lidia Bastianich

Join us on Saturday, May 12 from 12 p.m. – 2 p.m. as Fairway Market in Red Hook, Brooklyn teams up with PBS host and renowned chef Lidia Bastianich to support WNET. Lidia will be on hand to sign copies of her bestselling cookbook, Lidia’s Italy in America (Knopf), and share samples of mouthwatering pastas and sauces.

While you’re enjoying the fun, you can show us your support — Fairway Market Red Hook will donate 10% of all sales from noon to 2 p.m. to WNET. And don’t miss your chance to win a prize pack, including Lidia’s new book, Lidia’s Italy in America, a gift card from Fairway, and a THIRTEEN/WLIW21 tote bag! Enter online now or text “LIDIA” to 30644.

Lidia’s new series, based on the book of the same title, Lidia’s Italy in America, airs on Saturdays at 6:30 p.m. on THIRTEEN, Mondays at 8 p.m. on WLIW21 and Saturdays at 3 p.m. on NJTV.

About the debate:
Corruption and a growing concern for head injury have put college football in the spotlight. Are football programs’ millions in profits exploitation? Or are they still a celebration of amateur sport? Does football’s inherent danger and violence have any place in institutions of higher learning? Or does it provide young men with educational opportunities they would not otherwise have?

Ringmaster Tino Ponce with 'Circo' director Aaron Schock

Aaron Schock wanted to make a documentary about Mexico that wasn’t about immigration, for a change. While scouting for subjects in the rural communities off the beaten path, he happened upon a traveling circus. The intimate, pastoral, and lyrical Circo tells the story of a circus family desperately trying to carry on a centuries-old tradition against difficult odds.

Circo premieres Sunday, May 6 on THIRTEEN.

Interview courtesy of Independent Lens. For more interviews and other Independent Lens film content, visit their blog.

What led you to make Circo?

The inspiration for Circo was a desire to reverse the direction of the documentary lens that has typically looked at Mexico only from the border up and singularly through the subject of immigration. Instead, I wanted to go deep into the Mexican countryside and find a story that could communicate both the richness and the complexities of a vast culture and social order unfamiliar to most Americans.

My original plan was to make a film about corn farmers. But one night while I was in a small village doing field research, a traveling circus came to town. That night I went to the circus. The plan changed.

What impact do you hope this film will have?

I want the audience to walk away with a heightened awareness of the difficult choices faced by rural Mexicans, for whom a way of life that has sustained them for generations in increasingly unviable, and alternatives are few.

What were some of the challenges you faced in making this film?

Probably my biggest challenge was also one of my greatest assets. During production I worked completely alone, enabling me to achieve the intimacy that I want with my subjects, and combining direction with cinematography to achieve the visual filmmaking I aspire to. But this approach does not come without certain difficulties and liabilities. When you are lost in not knowing what you should film next, or when you need someone to look over your shoulder and offer advice, or when you just need some reassurance you are doing something of value, it can be a challenge when in the field.

How did you gain the trust of the Ponce family?

I believe that from the start, the Ponces were honored to have someone take so much interest in their life and tradition. Of course, when I started, neither the Ponces nor I knew the story would center on a family conflict and a marital crisis. This only emerged later, but at that point the trust and mutual respect had been established, and we made the decision together that this material would make it into the film.

What would you have liked to include in your film that didn’t make the cut?

We had a scene with the circus’ patriarch Don Gilberto negotiating with an official of a small town over the amount that they would charge the circus to set up. While surely adept at shaking people down, the official was no match for Don Gil, and the scene is both telling about small town corruption in Mexico and the adept skills of individuals to circumvent them. It’s also full of Beckett-like humor.

Tell us about a scene in the film that especially moved or resonated with you.

There is a scene in the film when the Ponce family children take a break from the circus and wander around an empty tourist site, eventually finding their way into an uncompleted mansion. Their poignant response to the experience, witnessing their discovery of Mexico’s keen social inequality in such a naturalistic way, and the sheer surrealistic Last Year in Marienbad-like setting makes it perhaps my favorite.

What has the audience response been so far? Have the Ponces seen it, and if so, what did they think?

Circo has been both a critical and commercial success, finding distribution in several countries and a robust theatrical release here in the U.S. But the most meaningful screening for me was in Mexico at the Morelia International Film Festival, with the Ponce family in attendance. I wanted the family to experience what I had experienced from audiences in other screenings: love and respect for their tradition and their struggle. We did a outdoor screening of the film in Morelia’s central plaza before about 800 people, and it was so beautiful — they were so warmly embraced by an audience of their compatriots. For all of us, it was a very emotional night.

The independent film business is tough. What keeps you motivated?

For me, first of all it is about being behind the camera while in the field. That immediate moment is where it all begins, capturing a moment that has both aesthetic and symbolic meaning — and the conviction that it is worth all the bother it takes to bring it to the screen.

Why did you choose to present your film on public television?

For its large and engaged audiences, public television is hands-down the best venue for showcasing independent documentary on television.

What didn’t you get done when you were making your film?

Ten other films I would have loved to make.

What are your three favorite films?

In documentary, San Soleil (1983) for its ideas, The Gleaners and I (2000) for its heart, and Rain (1929) for its pure visual storytelling.

What advice do you have for aspiring filmmakers?

Your most precious and important commodity is your passion for your subject and your ideas.

There are no craft services on an indie doc set — what sustains you?

Mexican taquitos: like documentaries, best made with local ingredients, must be spicy, and always messy.

Oh Noah!, the PBS KIDS GO! web series formerly known as Noah Comprende, is rolling out a line-up of new animated interactive videos and games that introduce kids to Spanish. Games embedded in the videos, together with other interactive challenges and adventures on the website, provide children ages six to eight with an engaging introduction to Spanish vocabulary and common phrases.

The videos star nine-year-old Noah, who is staying with his grandmother in a community where everyone speaks Spanish. A series of misunderstandings launch comic misadventures for Noah, as he tries to communicate with others who don’t speak English. In Noah’s new adventures, language misunderstandings take him to the Arctic in a madcap search for a mama polar bear, to a dude ranch, where he lands on the back of a bucking bronco, and to the circus, where he finds himself part of a daring trapeze act.  Somehow Noah always manages to solve the problems he’s created, learning Spanish in the process.

Releases of new interactive videos will begin on May 3. In each of the short episodes, kids have the opportunity to move their cursors over objects on the screen to hear the names in Spanish and play a series of arcade-style games that reinforce learning.  Additionally, the Oh Noah! website will feature two new character-driven games that encourage replay and retention.

The May 3 launch will feature “Curtain Up!,” an open-ended introduction to digital storytelling in which the player creates a whimsical stage narrative by choosing sets, props, actors, music, and a title. “Noah’s Adventure,” which uses board game conventions as a springboard for a journey to places Noah visits in the videos, will debut later in May, along with another new interactive video. Games and videos will continue rolling out in June and throughout fall 2012.  Online games featured already on the site will be refreshed with new sets of thematically linked vocabulary words associated with each new video.  “Match It,” “You Catch It,” and “Word Race,” incorporate leveling and racing against the clock to encourage replay and repeated vocabulary exposure. “How Do You Say…?” helps kids learn common expressions in Spanish by matching illustrations to the appropriate phrase.

Each new Oh Noah! installment will offer dynamic hands-on activities for parents/caregivers and lesson plans for teachers that further explore the vocabulary introduced in the videos and games, and extend the learning.  Printables connected to the activities will be downloadable on the website.

—

Oh Noah! is produced by THIRTEEN in association with WNET, and funded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

Sandra Sheppard, director of THIRTEEN’S Children’s and Educational Media, and Jill Peters, director of creative development, serve as executive producers of Oh Noah!. Michelle Chen is producer, Marj Kleinman is senior web producer, and Corey Nascenzi is outreach manager.  David Matthew Feldman and Louise Gikow are the series writers. Mariana Swick is the educational advisor.  Renegade Animation produces the Oh Noah! animation and Bluemarker LLC is the website and game developer.

Photo courtesy of BBC/Hartswood Films for MASTERPIECE

Tonight, PBS and WNET will host a special Sherlock: Season Two screening in New York City. Following the screening will be a Q&A panel with actor Benedict Cumberbatch, co-creator Steven Moffat, producer Sue Vertue and series executive producer Rebecca Eaton, with opening remarks by Stephen Segaller, WNET’s Vice President of Programming.

Season Two of Sherlock premieres May 6 at 9 p.m. on THIRTEEN.

Watch the Q&A here, live at approximately 8:15 p.m. ET*:

*Schedule is subject to minor change, please stay tuned if the panel begins a few moments late.

Interview courtesy of Independent Lens. For more interviews and other Independent Lens film content, visit their blog.

What impact do you hope your film will have?

The film deals with a part of American history that is not well known. I’d like that history to become more common knowledge. Understanding our past and current relationship with bison – the most iconic of all native North American wildlife – I hope will help us improve that relationship in the future.

What led you to make Facing the Storm?

Bison are the most iconic of all native North American wildlife. In many ways, the image of bison represents the wild and the American wilderness. Yet, they are the only animal that is not allowed to be wild essentially anywhere in our country. That root of that irony is of great interest to me.

What were some of the challenges you faced in making this film?

It’s a big subject to fit into a one-hour TV documentary, so it was challenging to figure out which stories to tell. No matter what approach I took, there were going to be great stories about the human relationship with bison that would be left out.

How did you gain the trust of the subjects in your film?

If a filmmaker has a genuine interest in the stories people have to tell, in most cases they will be willing to tell them. So, expressing sincere interest in everyone’s perspective that we would present in the film was the simplest path to gain their trust and getting our subjects to participate.

What would you have liked to include in Facing the Storm that didn’t make the cut?

There are literally dozens of great stories we could not include. A few come to mind. The creation of the National Bison Range in Montana and how Salish people in Montana were instrumental in bringing wild bison to the national refuge is a great story. Northern Mexico is home to a herd of truly wild bison and they are highly regarded on the Mexican side of the border, but considered a nuisance to some degree when they cross into the U.S. That would have been a good story to include or investigate further. On a fairly regular basis the Inter-Tribal Bison Cooperative (ITBC) is successful at helping establish a new herd of bison in Indian Country. We would really have liked to film the creation of one of these new herds, but the timing was never right.

Tell us about a scene in the film that especially moved or resonated with you.

I think one of my favorite scenes is the William T. Hornaday story, in large part because Dan Flores is such a great storyteller himself. Between Flores, Montana historian David Parchen, the music of Ivan Rosenberg and Mike Grigoni, and Andy Smetanka’s animation, the scene really takes you to the place in time when the great wildlife conservationists of the day were faced with the likelihood that bison would be completely wiped off the face of the earth.

What has the audience response been so far?

The response has been great at every screening I’ve been to. People from all over the U.S. seem to connect with the film and the struggle of bison to be themselves.

The independent film business is tough. What keeps you motivated?

I’ve been making documentaries since 1992. Despite the difficulties, I have never really considered anything else as a primary occupation. It’s just so empowering to share these stories that I find important and interesting.

Why did you choose to present your film on public television?

Frankly, PBS is one of only a couple outlets on U.S. television where independent filmmakers can be true to their artistic vision and tell stories like the one that is central in Facing the Storm: Story of the American Bison.

What are your three favorite films?

It’s pretty hard to narrow this to three, but they would definitely all be docs, and these three come to mind immediately – American Movie, Hoop Dreams, and Vernon, Florida (all the films of Errol Morris, really). A couple of others – Bones of the Forest, In the Reign of Twilight, A Perfect Candidate, Anvil: The Story of Anvil, End of an Old Song, Crumb, and Year of the Horse.

What advice do you have for aspiring filmmakers?

Stick with it. It’s not necessarily an easy endeavor, but it will get easier and while it may not be financially rewarding, it will always be rewarding nonetheless. I can pretty much guarantee that.

What do you recommend for sustenance while making an independent film?

Coffee and beer. Alternate in approximately 12-hour intervals.

Learn more about the campaign and view previous videos here.

Revenge of the Electric Car airs Sunday, April 22 at 11:30 p.m. on THIRTEEN.

Interview courtesy of Independent Lens. For more interviews and other Independent Lens film content, visit their blog.

What impact do you hope this film will have?

I hope viewers will feel energized to persevere in their own passions no matter how difficult. The film offers a unique personal view of entrepreneurship in America today  in terms of one of the biggest industries in the world, the automobile. Within that microcosm you can see how the system works and as usual – individual leadership is a big part of it.

In terms of the electric car revolution, I hope it inspires peoples to test drive or buy the new generation plug-in cars.  Change is so difficult and it takes a lot of early adopters to make the leap.  They’ll be really glad they did.  This is a leap worth taking, I can say wholeheartedly.  If the film inspires that, I’ll be happy.

What led you to make this film?

Last time, we made a film about how vested interests can disrupt or destroy innovation and why we need to fight to change the system from the outside.  This time we wanted to make a film about how very different kinds of personalities worked within the system to bring innovation to market even with huge obstacles.  The electric car of course is the subject to both stories.

The electric car is a symbol of innovation. So when everyone started coming back to the table after the 1990s debacle, we already had the experience and connections that might allow us to tell a very different kind of story then the first one – and to inspire hope instead of anger. Both of these emotions are important in activating change. That would be a nice bookend, especially since our film plays not just in the mainstream, but in schools and a lot of places where you are influencing people about what society is capable of.

What were some of the challenges you faced in making this film, after you skewered many of its subject in your first film?

At the end of 2008 markets collapsed and all the characters we were following hit the wall.  We had to rethink our film, find its center again, and keep moving. For awhile the film’s title in our editing room was Curse of the Electric Car.

How did you gain the trust of the subjects in your film? It’s a competitive industry in a race to dominate a potentially extremely lucrative market. That’s a lot of intellectual property.

One step at a time.  It’s a process.  We were completely independently financed and it took time for them to understand what we wanted to document and for us to film enough to get behind the corporate veil and find our story.  We had very strict agreements not to share content with other car companies or with anyone for that matter.  Consider, two companies went public during our three years, and one went bankrupt.

What would you have liked to include in your film that didn’t make the cut?

We decided not to make an issue movie, because we had done that in the prior film.  To do it well again, we would have to make a miniseries rather then a 90 minute documentary.  However, there are many issues that we would have liked to address on behalf of the electric car. For example, one of the biggest users of electricity in the world is the oil industry — simply to refine gasoline from crude oil. We could save so many resources by simply putting that electricity directly into our cars and bypassing the middle man.

When Gadget uncovers a small operating part from an electric car in the vast ruins of his garage and says he can build a new car from this part. That symbolizes the perseverance all our characters shared in terms of dealing with setbacks.

What has the audience response been so far?

Audiences are shocked by our level of access given the confrontational position we took with the first film, and surprised by our tone.  I see the two films as kind of inverse mirrors of each other – both talking about the perils of getting anything truly revolutionary done.

The independent film business is rough.  What keeps you motivated?

It comes down to passion for your subject and the challenge of telling good stories with a team.  I’m on the board of a group called Impro Theater. They do long-form unscripted theater and I see documentary making as somewhat like that. You never know quite where you are headed and that’s part of the fun for the filmmakers and the audience.

Why did you choose to present your film on public television?

We wanted to reach the largest amount of people possible and PBS really responded positively to the film. We know the film will be celebrated here.

What are your characters like in real life?

Probably our most-asked question from audiences is that:  What are Bob, Elon, Carlos, and Gadget like in “real life.” I have to say, almost exactly like they are in the film.  They are bigger-than-life characters because they live so deeply in their passions and ambitions.

What didn’t you get done when you were making your film?

At least another two hours of storytelling. Keeping things to 90 minutes or less is always a challenge but asking your audiences to stay longer isn’t fair.

What are your three favorite films?

The answer really depends on the day, the year, the venue, and the quality of the popcorn.  I don’t like films with guns in them except maybe the Guns of Navarone, Naked Gun, and Naked Gun 2 ½.  I really liked Sleeper and Shine when they came out.  Who Framed Roger Rabbit? inspired the name Who Killed the Electric Car? and the topic wasn’t too far off either, if you recall.  This is Spinal Tap is my favorite mockumentary about the decline of a rockband in the 1970s.  A great double feature for that film is the 2009 doc Anvil, about the travails of a Canadian metal band. Other terrific documentaries include Gasland; Inside Job; Waste Land; Why We Fight; Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room; Brother’s Keeper; Truck Farm; Genghis Blues, and classics like Hearts and Minds, which made me rethink everything I thought I knew about military power.

What advice do you have for aspiring filmmakers?

Get a great team together to work with. Filmmaking to me is a community experience, from financing to filming, from the music to the editing, from the press to the distribution.  At every level, find amazing people, build trust, then let them tell their stories without interrupting. Ask hard questions, listen.

About the debate:

Does the internet poison politics? It’s been argued that the rise of “personalization,” the use of algorithms to filter what you see online, and easy access to the like-minded, have served to reinforce our pre-conceptions. Is the information bubble a myth, or is it undermining civic discourse? Is the rise of social media really broadening our world views, or narrowing them?

To kick off the partnership with Columbia University, MetroFocus featured an online video segment and article about the personalized plaques found on some 3,000 Central Park benches and the effort to catalog the backstories of the dedications.

“For nearly 50 years, THIRTEEN  has been committed to education—from the programs we air to the schools and educators in our region that we serve”, said Neal Shapiro, President and CEO.  ”We look forward to more journalism school partnerships in the coming months and are pleased to be partnering with Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism to showcase students’ inspired stories and content on MetroFocus. It’s another way we’re serving the tri-state community.”

The first student journalist piece featured on MetroFocus was produced by current Columbia students Monica Alba and Angela Reese under the direction of Columbia Associate Professor Betsy West, a former senior vice president for CBS News, where she oversaw “60 Minutes,” “60 Minutes II” and “48 Hours.”

“This is an exciting partnership for the Columbia Journalism School students in my class,” said Columbia Journalism Associate Professor Betsy West. “Here they are, gathered from around the world, to find and report stories in New York City and now they have an outlet at the city’s premier public television station. It’s a fantastic opportunity for them as well as for MetroFocus viewers to see some fascinating stories.”

This partnership is the first of several journalism school partnerships in the planning. Student journalists from other journalism schools in the Tri-State area will also produce and submit content regularly to MetroFocus for use online, on mobile and on-air in the upcoming MetroFocus specials this spring and summer.

The nominees, announced today by the International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences, were chosen from nearly 10,000 entries from over 60 countries and all 50 states.

Have a favorite web site or app that you think is deserving of a Webby? Place your vote with The Webby People’s Voice Awards!

WNET received nominations for:

PBS Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly:  Best Websites – Religion & Spirituality Category

Women, War and Peace Documentary Shorts: Online Film & Video – Documentary Series Category

Beyond WNET, PBS also received nominations for:

pbskids.org: Best Youth web site; other nominees include Sesame Street, Muppets and National Geographic.

pbs.tv: Best Television web site; other nominees include Hulu and HBO Connect.

PBS for iPad: Best tablet (Entertainment category); other nominees include HBO GO and The Onion.

In addition to Webby nominations, the PBS Kids Video App and PBS Arts: Off Book were each designated as an Official Honoree of the Webby Awards.

Congratulations to all of our nominees for their outstanding work!

Live from the Artists Den featuring Iron and Wine airs Friday, April 6 at 10:30 p.m. on THIRTEEN.

Watch a behind-the-scenes video and check out the full song list below:

Song List:

Me And Lazarus
Jesus The Mexican Boy
Walking Far From Home
Lovesong Of The Buzzard
Half Moon
Lion’s Mane
Sunset Soon Forgotten
Boy With A Coin
Naked As We Came
House By The Sea
Arms Of A Thief
Devil Never Sleeps
Rabbit Will Run

Filmmaker Pamela Roberts with Ira Joe Johnson, who, in revealing a historical secret about Margaret Mitchell, sparked her interest in the iconic author. Photo courtesy of Pamela Roberts.

Inside Thirteen recently spoke with filmmaker Pamela Roberts, whose upcoming American Masters film Margaret Mitchell: American Rebel delves into the fascinating life of one of America’s most compelling authors. Roberts shares what first drew her to the literary icon, and the complexities and challenges she faced in making the film.

Margaret Mitchell: American Rebel premieres Monday, April 2 at 9 p.m. on THIRTEEN. Enter our giveaway for a chance to win anniversary edition DVDs, books, and more, and visit American Masters on Facebook for polls and discussions relating to the film.

Inside Thirteen: Were you always a fan of Gone With the Wind? What inspired you to make this film?

Pamela Roberts: I liked the movie but had never read the book. I didn’t think a thing about the movie or Gone with the Wind…having seen it as a much younger person, I just left it where it was, and that was that. Then I got a call about four years ago from a man named Ira Joe Johnson, who is featured in the film, asking if I knew of the secret history related to Margaret Mitchell and her connection with funding African American higher education in the South, especially for doctors. Johnson went to Morehouse College, which is a very good college for black men in the South. Dr. Benjamin Mays was the president of the college in the early 1940s, just after Gone with the Wind had come out. It was well known that Margaret Mitchell was rich, so Mays approached her secretly and asked her to help fund African American education, especially for blacks who dreamed of becoming doctors in the South. Mitchell agreed to do it, and did it until she died. Throughout the 1940s, she secretly gave money to educate dozens of African American doctors. She was taking a huge risk because it was a very difficult time racially in the South – if her secret philanthropy had been discovered, she probably would have been killed. So here is a person who wrote a racially controversial book in her mid-twenties and who later risked her life to give to the black community. I wanted to understand Mitchell’s amazing odyssey, the arc of change in her life – that’s what interested me and why we did it.

IT: How do you think Margaret’s tomboyish upbringing shaped her identity as an adult?

PR: Her mother, Maybelle, allowed Mitchell to be herself. Even though they had a difficult relationship in a lot of ways, Maybelle understood that she had a special kid, and Margaret was allowed to be Margaret. She wore pants and was allowed to be one of the boys, which just didn’t happen back then, in the Victorian era.

When Maybelle died, Margaret’s father and her brother frowned upon the way she behaved. Maybelle was an early feminist and had a huge impact on Mitchell’s life. But she did have blinders – in her deathbed letter, she still stressed to Mitchell that she had to be a wife and a mother first, before she could be her own person.

IT: How much of herself did Margaret Mitchell put into her characters? Or those she knew?

PR: I would say Mitchell is a combination of Scarlett O’Hara and Melanie Wilkes. Scarlett represented the New South, the willingness to adapt to a new and more progressive way of life in order to survive. Melanie, with her genteel manners and kindness, lived in a dream world that no longer existed. Like the Antebellum South, Melanie did not survive. Mitchell and Scarlet were both rebels who fought against restrictions placed on women but Mitchell also appreciated the beauty of the Old South as represented by Melanie. Mitchell’s genius lay in her creation of complex, well-rounded characters who were neither all good or all bad. She understood that it took a ruthless and cunning Scarlett O’Hara to accomplish what she did, and a Rhett Butler who could see the truth of the Southern situation and still be part of it.

I think Mitchell understood humanity. Is she one of these characters? She’s not entirely; she’s a real creator, so she’s not just going to make her life into Scarlett O’Hara. The interesting thing the biographers said is that some of Mitchell’s mother, Maybelle, got translated into Rhett Butler – I was shocked by that at first and then realized it was true. If you look at statements in Gone with the Wind that Rhett Butler makes about how the Southerners had blinders on – they thought they had this great way of being that nobody could undermine, they didn’t see that the only way to survive was to change, to be more like the industrial North, and that the era of cotton and slaves was really over. Mitchell as a child learned a similar lesson from her mother which she later wrote about, and at one point in our film Maybelle tells Mitchell, “You’ve got to understand that this world is not going to last – it’s going to be upended and you’ve got to be ready for it.”

In this reenactment from the film, Margaret Mitchell (played by Atlanta journalist Katie Leslie) begins writing Gone With the Wind at her apartment in Atlanta. Photo courtesy of Georgia Public Broadcasting.

IT: How did you decide on the format of the film – to feature actors and re-enactments?

PR: We did have a lot of photos and a lot of good archival material on Margaret Mitchell, but photos can’t really reveal the depth and emotional complexity of one’s life. Plus, what was great is that we had her journals and her letters, so we were able to base the reenactments on what she felt about her life, and I think we were able to hit the emotional highlights that way. I felt comfortable that I was not making stuff up out of nowhere – I based it out of her own writings.

The woman who played Margaret Mitchell is an actual reporter for The Atlanta Journal Constitution, just like Margaret Mitchell was! When I met Katie Leslie at a press conference, I thought, “She’s an absolute dead wringer for Margaret Mitchell!” She’s a major reporter here in Atlanta, so it’s interesting that we got a reporter to play a reporter.

IT: Why do you think Mitchell asked her husband to burn the original Gone With the Wind manuscript upon her death?

PR: Honestly, that is still not really understood. There are a lot of things about Margaret Mitchell that we’ll never ultimately know why. There was some controversy because it was such a big book for a first-time novelist. It was a runaway best seller and won the Pulitzer Prize. People thought, “This just came out of nowhere, did she really write this? Maybe her husband, John Marsh, wrote the book. Maybe somebody at Macmillan helped her. Or her father, since he founded the Atlanta Historical Society. But surely this little woman couldn’t have done the whole thing!” Her husband John Marsh, who was her editor, wrote a letter to his mother telling her not to believe the rumors that he wrote the book. But people refused to understand. It hurt Mitchell’s feelings terribly. In the margins of the original manuscript were Marsh’s corrections, and at one point two or three pages were exhibited in the Atlanta Public Library. People jumped to the conclusion that her husband must have done more than just edit the book. Mitchell probably didn’t want people taking the manuscript apart, which she knew they would, and just analyzing every aspect of it to try to prove that she didn’t write it.

While the original manuscript was destroyed, the revised manuscript she did for Macmillan that eventually became the novel was not. And John Marsh did save chapters. He knew that people would still be challenging her authorship, and he didn’t want that.

IT: What do you think led Mitchell to change her views on race and segregation?

PR: She might have been slowly evolving, but when Hattie McDaniel and the other black actors couldn’t come to Atlanta for the movie premiere, and when McDaniel couldn’t sit at the same table as the rest of the cast at the Oscars, I think Mitchell felt guilty. She wrote to McDaniel at four in the morning on the day after the premiere. She saw how much McDaniel had accomplished and how she was still being mistreated. There is additional correspondence between the two of them that has only recently been discovered – they stayed in touch for a long time and they really respected each other.

IT: What was the most challenging part of making this film?

PR: The most challenging part is when experts and biographers differ on things. For Public Broadcasting, you want to make sure you’re not misrepresenting anything. Ultimately, you have to make your own decision – you can’t be on the fence about it. I go through that with every project, but this one was bigger.

When I decided to tell the Smith College story in which Mitchell refused to be in class with a black student, I got some criticism, and there were two or three experts who told me not to include it. But that information came from a letter Mitchell wrote to her mother, so we know it happened. So it was also a matter of being willing to shatter some of the precious myths that people hold about Margaret Mitchell. She was not a perfect person and she would be the first to admit it.

The other thing is that the estate of Margaret Mitchell had to approve what I was doing, so I had a nail biting time when I told them what I was working on, including telling some unpleasant truths. You have to have a lot of guts to do a project with controversy in it. I also knew that in a lot of ways, Margaret Mitchell didn’t want all this dug up! She wasn’t comfortable being this huge icon. She didn’t see herself that way, but the South chose to see her that way, and her life was in some ways virtually shattered by Gone with the Wind. She enjoyed being just a member of her community; it was very important to her to be a normal person. She couldn’t be that anymore, and she hated every part of it. She was a true rebel, but not so much in the Southern sense as in the larger sense – hence the title, Margaret Mitchell: American Rebel.

Series Producer Bill Murphy spoke with THIRTEEN about the dedication and detail that go into the creation of television’s premier natural history series.

This interview was originally conducted and condensed for the April 2012 THIRTEEN Program Guide.

Nature is one of the most-watched primetime series on public television. Why does the series continue to attract so many viewers and filmmakers?

Bill Murphy: I think it’s because we’re committed to finding the most interesting stories in our genre, spending the appropriate time researching and developing films before we go into production, and working with the best filmmakers in the natural history business. And, of course, we couldn’t do it without the loyal support of THIRTEEN and its viewers.

Filmmakers are always telling me how much they love working with THIRTEEN and the Nature team because we know what we’re doing and they trust our guidance and support. I like to think that’s true, but I also know the best filmmakers in this business are very attracted to the fact that we can tell out our stories without commercial interruption. That’s a real luxury in today’s media landscape.

How do you find story ideas, and what qualities do you look for when considering submissions?

BM: There are many paths to finding story ideas that work for Nature.  Ideas are pitched to us by both domestic and international independent producers, as well as major broadcast commissioners like the BBC and National Geographic.  Some of the things we think about when evaluating proposals are: Is this story a right fit for Nature?  How strong is the story and will it hold our audience’s attention?  Does the producer have the talent, access, and experience to make the film in question?  Although Nature is known for its story-driven classic blue chip natural history films and stunning cinematography work, such as Ocean Giants — which is scheduled for rebroadcast three consecutive Wednesdays beginning March 28 — we also feel it’s important to address some of the key topical conservation issue-oriented stories as we did in Salmon: Running the Gauntlet, which looks at the collapsing Pacific salmon populations and the ongoing debate on how to save this endangered species.

We’re also attracted to stories that require “special access” and give our viewers an inside look at an environmental situation that may otherwise be off-limits. One of Nature’s filmmaking teams took great risks to produce Braving Iraq, the story of one man’s extraordinary efforts to restore both animals and people in the Mesopotamian Marshes in Iraq destroyed by Saddam Hussein in the early 1990’s.  And Radioactive Wolves examines the health of wildlife populations in Chernobyl’s exclusion zone, the area around the reactor that remains too dangerously radioactive for human habitation 25 years after the meltdown of the nuclear power plant.  You can catch a special encore presentation of this film Wednesday, April 25.

Watch a preview of Ocean Giants:

You work closely with wildlife filmmakers who have a wide range of experience and narrative styles. What does your work with them involve, and what do you find most rewarding about these collaborations?

BM: I have a great job!  I get to work closely with some of the most passionate and dedicated people in the filmmaking business who, in spite of long grueling days working in some of the most inhospitable environments, all seem to really love what they do for a living and are genuinely grateful that we’re providing them with the opportunity to make films for Nature’s loyal audience. Every film requires a different level of attention, but in general my job involves working with my colleagues on the development of stories and shaping our films editorially, both in the field and during post production.  I’m also responsible for pitching story ideas to potential international co-production partners in order to raise funds to help us finance our big projects, and I act as the point person on the Nature team for producers and co-production partners on all production-related questions and concerns. I also negotiate all the production and co-production deals.

Do you have a favorite personal memory from your 15 years of working on Nature?

BM: One of my favorite memories was spending time in Alaska during the Winter of 1999  filming  one of my favorite Nature programs, Sled Dogs: An Alaskan Epic. It was an extremely cold winter with evening temperatures averaging 50 degrees below zero as we followed several sled dog teams participating in the Iditarod race from Anchorage to Nome.  Nature was still shooting on super 16mm film at that time and it was so cold the film was snapping in half as we tried to load it into the cameras.   Our production team slept mostly in tents and, when lucky, cabins as we traveled across the beautiful state of Alaska using planes, helicopters and snow mobiles. The film crew was fantastic and somehow found a way to persevere all of the weather and logistical challenges and still make a beautiful film.

Is there a program you’re particularly excited about in the 30th anniversary season or beyond?

BM: One of my favorite programs that premiered during Nature’s 30th season is My Life as a Turkey, the true story of writer, naturalist, and “turkey mom” Joe Hutto.  If you haven’t seen it, I recommend streaming it from Thirteen.org.  It’s must-see TV.  I’m also very excited about our pipeline of films in production for our 31st season,  so stay tuned!

Watch the full episode of My Life as a Turkey:

The concert features songs from Lee’s latest album, as well as past hits like “Windows Are Rolled Down” and “Keep it Loose, Keep it Tight.”

Live from the Artists Den with Amos Lee airs Friday, March 23 at 10 p.m. on THIRTEEN.

Watch a behind-the-scenes video and view the full song listing below:

Song list:

“Keep it Loose, Keep it Tight”
“Cup of Sorrow”
“El Camino”
“Hello Again”
“Street Corner”
“Low Down Life”
“Skipping Stone”
“Out of the Cold”
“Truth”
“Violin”
“Jesus”
“Windows Are Rolled Down”
“Behind Me Now”
“7 Spanish Angels”

About the debate:

For all appearances, China has emerged unscathed from the global economic crisis, in stark contrast to its biggest debtor, America. China’s admirers point to its ability to mobilize state resources, quick decision-making and business-friendly environment as reasons for its economic ascendancy. But can its brand of state-directed capitalism overcome rampant corruption and the threat of growing inequality, or will the American model of innovation and free markets prevail?