2. I understand that you graduated from Vassar College with a degree in Film, which is widely known as one of the top liberal arts colleges in the country. I also note that a good majority of graduates from that school are female. Besides these facts, were there other reasons for your election to attend here? 

​It was an incredible education, and they have an amazing film program. They possess small intimate class sizes and a really intellectually rigorous campus life. It truly is a gorgeous campus, and it has been co-ed since 1969. I had an incredible time being a student there.

3. In doing my research, I found out that CBS and Netflix were just two of many places in which you worked in production. I am certain that there are thousands of others who dream of making their way into these buildings to work. Any secrets you can share to producers as to how to solidify a role with a top notch network?

​The best way is to actually work for smaller production companies ​or those who produce the shows that you like to watch and reach out to them. Ther​e are always entry level positions for people right out of college or even people out of high school, whether that be production assistant or research. A hardworking, positive attitude really can help people rise up through the ranks and be willing to take on more responsibilities. Another way to go about it is to make your own films and just start directing your own stuff as much as you possibly can.

4. I see that you had previously worked on a Bob Marley film, and I am sure you know of the one that Hollywood just put out. Tell me how your project differs from today's film. 

​That was actually something that Jeff and I worked on together. He was the executive producer for it, and it was an eight-part documentary film series that aired on Netflix. Netflix and I were the archival producers on that project, procuring films and videos and footage from all over the world.

Both stories are similar. They are both about the event where Bob Marley was shot right before going to perform at the Smile Jamaica concert in 1976. It just an incredible story. I'm not surprised that they have made it into a feature film. Outside of that, I would say that ours was a documentary that utilized archival footage and interviews to tell the story, whereas theirs is scripted and has actors.

5. Of all your occupations, you chose to act in only one production - Lovell Gleason Wears Glasses. Why is that? 

I've acted in a few friends' short films over the years, and even as recently as a couple years ago. It's not an occupation. It's nothing I've ever done before for money. It is just something to help a friend out and I enjoy acting for the camera. I have a performance background, and it is something I enjoy enjoyed being a part of - but it has not been something for me to pursue.

6. Lastly, what made you want to sign on to help write and produce How to Come Alive with Norman Mailer?

Jeff and I knew each other from doing the work on the remastered series for Netflix that I just talked about, and Jeff presented this project to me so as to serve as lead producer. I hadn't read that much of Norman Mailer at that time. I read one of his books when I was in high school many, many years ago. So I knew who he was, but I didn't know that much. And I, before I came on, did a little bit of personal digging about Norman and just found myself incredibly intrigued by his life, his story and his ideas. What a complicated, challenging person he was. I felt really personally challenged by who he was. I thought that was a very interesting perspective to come in and be a part of this project, working with Jeff and the rest of our team.

Every day, I felt a different way about Norman. I really ran the gamut - some days I loved him and some days I hated him. Some days I was inspired by him, while other days I was frustrated with him because he really is a man who lived an existentialist life; a life on the edge.  I found that very inspiring, despite some of the more gruesome episodes in his life. Over the span of seven decades, I didn't want to just judge a man by the worst moments of his life. I wanted to know everything about him. He was endlessly fascinating. I'm so glad that I took on this project. I found it to be one of the most inspiring projects I've ever worked on and really am very proud of the film that we've made. 

Jeff:

All Rise Films was founded in 2004, and you produce premium documentary storytelling. Tell me, as a filmmaker, what is the true definition of a documentary?

The definition of a documentary is always evolving, but the main components are that it is a nonfiction production that applies the rules of integrity journalism and is transparent about any editorial liberties that are taken. This is in contrast to a scripted project, which is in and of itself as a form of acknowledging that it is either loosely based on or inspired by real events or not at all. 

To date, what is the top production you created, and your reasoning behind your belief?

I always say that it is like choosing your favorite baby. You do not love any one of them any more or less than any other. There are some that I have liked working on more than others partly because the team really gels and has a good time and treats each other like family, whereas with some of the others, there is a lot of anxiety and higher stakes and politics. Certainly the last two things that I have done, Skywalkers and How to Come Alive with Norman Mailer, have been among the most pleasurable processes I have been a part of to date. This is partly because we had a great team; many repeat players between the two projects. We all have a lot of history working together, so not only was the process a well-oiled machine, but we really enjoyed engaging and challenging each other creatively and growing from it. There was a lot of respect and not a lot of ego in those creative processes, so it is a beautiful thing when you have the time and the passion from everybody.  

You are honestly the first person I have interviewed who has won a Peabody and Dupont. I also have seen your sense of humor, and especially when it comes to awards. Curious to ask: does this track record make doors open more easily?

Yeah, it is a word of scarcity and often, when you do not have enough opportunities or resources to support everyone’s dreams, that means you end up competing with your friends and fellow filmmakers and colleagues for those scarce resources. You just have to find those little external encouragements to keep you going. Often, there is a lot of rejection in this field, so getting an award, grant, good review, some financing or a pat on the back from a role model goes a long way into refiling the tank. It provides more fuel to continue to push and be persistent, especially in those long spells when you are not getting much external validation. I would also like to recognize that with awards, they are fleeting. The impact/momentum that is gained by winning a Dupont, Emmy or Peabody is great for a little while, but then it runs out and you need to refuel the tank again. 

The stuff that lasts is the impact that these projects have once they are out in the world and what you learn on each production that you take to the next one. I like to think of myself as a student when going into every project. When you view every production as its own startup company, it is exciting because you know you are coming into with an open mind. You are a fresh pallet of clay and you get remodeled and you learn new stuff. You approach it from different angles, and then you think about your life differently as a result.

Whether the awards lead to more opportunities or not, I think it all does. So much of it is a combination of factors that it is hard to point to any one thing - but the bigger the award, the more impact that it has on people wanting to work with you. It helps to promote your project. It is a stamp of approval that often tells audiences to pay more attention to this version versus all of the other myriad options they have.

Some of your past partnering includes: HBO, ESPN, Paramount and PBS. Do you prefer to partner more often with TV entities vs. film, or was this just how things landed?

I have had the honor and the privilege to work across lots of different formats. That is meant that I have worked on series, feature length projects, documentaries, and scripted work with actors. Additionally, I have collaborated with studios, streamers, and broadcasts. There are just so many pros and cons of each way of working. I would say that a lot of it has to do with where the industry is during any given moment. Obviously, when there was a lot of generosity and aggressive appetite in the streaming wars period, it was excellent to work with streamers and a lot of fun. There was willingness to try new things; there was open mindedness about breaking rules and trying to separate yourself from the pack by doing things differently. I loved having the creative and formal encouragement from the financer to do those things, along with the resources to employ my friends and my favorite people to work with. So often, it feels like it is one or the other. You either get to take risks and work with the people you love, or you do something more commercial that has resources. During that window, I was able to work on a number of projects where both things were true. At this moment, I am more inclined to work on independently financed features because it gives me an opportunity to really find the heart of the story and go further into the creative process. This is in contrast to pitching things earlier to distributors, where you end up inevitably having to speculate the story to a great extent 

Lastly, can you provide us any updates on your upcoming projects?

All Rise Films is always working on a number of projects at different times. These take place statewide and in different counties. It is an exciting stage, going after ambitious daring and bold projects. They are all risky, exciting and promising in their own ways, so more on that soon.

Film:

Your project, How to Come Alive with Norman Mailer, made its World Premiere at the DOC NY Film Festival.  May I ask what made you submit to them, and how was the overall experience? 

It was great. They are the biggest documentary festival in North America, I believe. It is a big networking opportunity amongst top filmmakers, as well as up-and-coming filmmakers doing nonfiction work - both in a social impact and entertainment context. You have a marketplace there with a lot of distributors as well as great peer-to-peer opportunities to meet with other folks in this line of work. So, we were excited to give it a premiere in New York, particularly given that Norman Mailer is a New Yorker. Further, much of our film takes place in New York to the point where we have often thought about New York as a sort of additional character in the movie. Mailer ran for Mayor of New York and had many visions for how to transform New York. Some of his life-changing incidents, including around the aftermath of the executioner's song, were really specific to New York City.

It was an incredible experience at Doc NYC. We had a packed house with an incredible response. People's reviews of the project were really positive and glowing and an excellent conversation was had after the film. Thus, it was a great place to launch it. Thereafter, we signed a deal with Kino Lorber and Zeitgeist to put the movie in cinemas around North America. That was a massive boon at the end of an otherwise great festival experience.

Norman was often referred to as violent, brash, controversial, insane - and even racist. So, I have to ask, what made you opt to center a movie around someone with so very many uncomfortable sides?  

Mailer was violent, brash, controversial, insane, and racist. I was sort of feeling like what a unique opportunity. This is a guy who has celebrated being the agitator, playing the role of the contrarian; the provocateur. Of course, he did that during a time in our history when it was considered a noble cultural contribution and doing town hall debates where the intention was not to beat the opponent, but really to hear the opponent and learn from the opponent. And ideas sparring through essays and through talk shows, all of these things were seen as a necessary part of elevating the consciousness of a society. He continued to fight for the importance of the intellectual rascal or the public intellectual, even as that role became less and less celebrated and less and less popular. You know, Mailer's prophecy was that over time, these town hall debates would lose out to, you know, echo chambers with pundits whose personalities eclipse the ideas that they were talking about and books would lose out to a fragmented excess of entertainment and technology, and that long, complex ideas would become reduced over and over again until they're nothing more than what we know today as a meme. So much of that prophecy has come true today. First of all, this was an incredible opportunity to engage with a different way of dealing with our intellect, with complex ideas, to confront our love-hate relationship with difficult ideas, difficult understandings. Secondly, we wanted to use Mailer as a punching bag, as a scapegoat, as a target, which is exactly what he would have wanted. I mean, over his career of six decades, he fought with a lot of conviction and bravery and imagination against these trends. If he was alive today, he and his children who we worked with on the project would all agree that he would want us to put him out there. He would want to be canceled over and over again…and he has been. You know, one of his big arguments is against political correctness. He called it left totalitarianism and how it's sort of killing the soul in each of us and that we need to be encouraged to be courageous and unabashed and worry less about other people's responses. So, it feels like a very relevant time to put out a film about a character like that. In terms of why we chose him, I would say the ideas first and foremost, but also because I'm a little bit more drawn to the anti-hero than the typical hero in the three-act structure that we sympathize with and root for the whole time. In this case, it's a roller coaster where hopefully the viewer feels that for five minutes at a time. You know, you're asking yourself, why haven't I gone further? Why haven't I pushed harder?  Then the next five minutes, like, oh, thank God I didn't push harder. So, there's an examination of how much courage and creativity we can find in ourselves to come alive here. You know, you don't have to hate Maler to learn from his mistakes. You don't have to love Maler to benefit from his mind and be ignited by his ideas.  

I like to discuss processes a great deal. Please elaborate on how you were able to collect so many individuals for interviews. In particular, was the family reserved at all about sharing their personal memories?

Well, the family first came to us and on our first call, it was John Buffalo, Danielle and Stu Schreiberg, executive producer of the film. Danielle and John Buffalo explained that it was coming up on what would be Mailer's 100th birthday; his centennial. They were going to be publishing some of his work, and they wanted to make a documentary. Stu and I were very clear that we didn't really have interest in making a hagiography where the family sort of edits everything critical out. It had to be warts and all – spending equal energy on Mailer's flaws, his ego, mistakes, sins and the pain and consequences of his actions on others.  

Danielle was one of the Mailer children, and one of the girls who was in the house when Mailer stabbed his second wife, Adele Morales. She, in particular, stated that yes, we want you to include all of that. She felt it was necessary to telling his story. If you are going to make a movie that celebrates complex, provocative, and often uncomfortable ideas - then you must paint that exact portrait. That was an agreement from the beginning with the family.  

Between using the family's archive for the first time, the blessing of the family and working with Mailer's good friends, experts, biographers and archivists, that led to access to other interviewees. Between myself, Vicki and Stu’s track record, I think people felt that they were in good hands, and we developed enough trust to be able to get over thirty amazing interviews on this project. 

Might I also ask about the overall time from pre-production to finish? I imagine collecting all this data could take years.

The overall time was roughly a year, but we were lucky enough to have many years of previous work done by both Justin and Mike Lennon, who are the archivists for the estate.  

I discovered there are actual books and other films that were made about Norman. Please describe what steps you took to ensure that your masterpiece did not mimic that of any other filmmaker or writer.

Well, thank you for calling it a masterpiece. Yeah, we were not concerned about it mimicking other work because we felt that we weren't doing a comprehensive biopic, cradle to grave, sort of sprawling, all-inclusive, sorting the good work from the bad work and the good scandal from the bad scandal. We were more focused in on a singular discipline, which is this love-hate relationship we have as a society with complex ideas - the danger and benefit of them. So, we chose a chapter structure that used mailer quotes and quotes about mailer to kind of give thematic substance to each stage of his life and generally follow a chronology over the course of his transformation from you know, violence-driven, chauvinist and arrogant, insecure boy to a more self-deprecating, gracious, selfless family man and adult. We also look at how, over the course of 60 years, his worldview and philosophy for living either did or didn't help him to come alive. We then learn for ourselves which parts of that are applicable to our own lives. So, nobody had taken that approach before or had access to the family archive that we had. I don't think anything's been done before with a team that was as dedicated for this long and as talented as this team. We felt pretty confident from the beginning that we were going to make what we hoped to be the definitive Norman Mailer film. Thus far, the reviews have suggested that it is, which has been very flattering.  

You allow your audiences to get dark glimpses of him - the frustrations, fear, and madness. However, you also do not shy away from showing those moments of brilliance.  Has there ever been a thought about making this into a mini-series vs. feature film?

There is a scripted version of the Norman Mailer story that his son, John Buffalo, has been working on with some really impressive talent in Hollywood. It is a juicy role because he is such a rollercoaster character; so extreme on both sides of the spectrum in terms of being. A real courageous pioneer, visionary thinker and prophetic writer. Additionally, the darkest moments of his life were utterly disgusting, traumatic and traumatizing. Therefore, that spectrum is a great opportunity for a more character-focused, scripted project with a great actor in that role.

If people reading this interview wish to see this film, where can they find it now?

https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/amzn1.dv.gti.09116d61-f855-491f-b302-0d3ffea5eb04?ref_=imdbref_tt_ov_wbr_ovf__pvt_aiv&tag=imdbtag_tt_ov_wbr_ovf__pvt_aiv-20

Hopefully we will reach everybody who is interested.  We love your support of these little independent films with not a ton of resources behind them. They are given life by people choosing to go see them in the movie theaters and buy tickets and tell their friends.