Austin360 blogs > Austin Movie Blog > Archives > 2010 > March > 09
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
5 Questions with … Rebekah Ferguson, co-director of ‘Pelada’
Using a five-question format, we’re interviewing South by Southwest filmmakers about their movies before and during the festival, which runs March 12 through 20.
Here, we talk to Rebekah Ferguson, one of the directors of the documentary “Pelada,” which follows former collegiate soccer players Luke Boughen and Gwendolyn Oxenham as they travel the world playing in pick-up soccer games in fields and streets from Brazil to China, reconnecting with the game they love while pondering their futures.
“Pelada” screens at the Alamo South Lamar on Friday, March 19 at 03:30 PM; Sunday, March 14 at 7:15 PM at the G-Tech theater at the Austin Convention Center; and Noon on Monday, March 15 at Alamo South Lamar.
The M.O.: How did you and Ryan get involved with making the movie with Gwendolyn and Luke?
Rebekah Ferguson: Gwendolyn and I played varsity soccer together at Duke. She was a senior when I was a freshman, but we stayed close friends. The seedlings of “Pelada” took root late one night, when Gwendolyn and I were both pondering what we wanted to do next — I was graduating from Duke and she was graduating from Notre Dame graduate program in Creative Writing. We had both done short doc films at Duke and we found ourselves pondering the idea of the pickup soccer version of “Endless Summer.” One that had a has-been athlete’s perspective … but also one that went completely around the globe to really showcase the fact that soccer is a game you can find anywhere.
We had both traveled enough to know how easy it was to find a pickup game, but what we loved most about it wasn’t just the soccer. It was a way to gain admittance to other cultures, and other people that you might never find as a tourist. It was our street cred so to speak. Luke and Gwendolyn embodied that has-been mentality at the time, and really had that itch to figure out where soccer fit into their lives. Ryan was another classmate of ours at Duke, so we called him up. Funnily enough he was on the tail end of a year abroad. But as soon as he got back, he and I picked up cameras, Luke quit his job, Gwendolyn put her writing on hold, and we took off.
There are really two stories going on here: one about pick-up soccer games around the world and the other about dealing with the end of a dream and coming to terms with a new reality after competitive competition, especially in the case of Gwendolyn. Did you know there were these two narratives going in and how did you balance the telling of the two stories?
Yes, this was actually the perspective that we wanted to bring to the film. Luke, Gwendolyn, and I (and Ryan to a certain extent ,as well) had all climbed the ladder of competitive soccer in the U.S., culminating in college, semi pro, and for Gwendolyn, some professional soccer down in Brazil. So we all knew what it was like to grow up with that dream and then to realize that it’s not going to play out how you always thought it would. Seeing that psychology unfold through Luke and Gwendolyn seemed like the best way to tie the vignettes together.
I think Luke and Gwendolyn’s experiences are something that a lot of people can identify with, not just athletes. What’s specific to soccer is that their careers came to an end before they were ready, but everyone goes through that time when you have to reevaluate your life and find out if you are ready to move on. Their intensity as competitive athletes played out in an interesting way. It definitely led us to more adrenaline pumping situations, like San Pedro Prison in Bolivia, Mathare Valley in Nairobi, Iran … but it also had an interesting juxtaposition to some of the stories we found where people play for the pure joy. And at then end of the film, Gwendolyn is forced to confront the idea that soccer can carry on and take on a new meaning.
How did you guys pick which countries and locations you visited? Does any one leg of the trip stand out as your favorite or carry special meaning for you for any reason?
There were some places that were absolute must visits, like Brazil, for example. But we wanted to travel to a combination of soccer super powers and places that you would never hear about in FIFA World Cups. Also,. being a low budget indie film, we called in a lot of favors to family, friends of family, friends of friends, even people who didn’t know us to put us up and feed us. We quickly found out that it was the best thing for the film because staying with locals meant we immediately had a good pulse on where to find games.
One of my personal favorites was our time in Bolivia. One of the more daring (dare I say stupid) things we did was talk our way into San Pedro prison and bribe the prisoners into letting Luke and Gwendolyn play soccer for a day. It was such a crazy proposition, and literally started with a phone number we got off a blog to an English speaking prisoner inside San Pedro … from there we ran around the city, and finally got escorted in to negotiate with the prisoners, which you see unfold in the film. We were feeling the suspense the whole time, not knowing if it was going to work out — would they let Gwendolyn play, would they let us interview them. But once we got down to the crazy trapezoidal asphalt court squeezed between blocks of cells, decorated top to bottom with all the prison team emblems, we realized how much pride was at stake, and the intensity with which they played. That was when we realized this was going to be a great story. We went from being absolute outsider tourists to sharing post-game warm Coke and Fanta on the sidelines of a prison soccer court.
The trip to Iran and dealing with the social and government implications of women playing sports in public felt the weightiest and most perilous. Can you talk about that experience?
Our experience of being in Iran was so contrary to the typical American stereotypes. People were so friendly to us, and invited us in. But at the same time, as Americans, we were assigned a guide and driver that stayed with us at all times, and Gwendolyn and I had to wear hijabs and be completely covered out in public. We were also treading on tricky territory with our cameras, and so when we were told by our tour guide that the government was keeping tabs on us, it was pretty nerve wracking. We weren’t sure if it was because Gwendolyn played, our cameras, or a combination of both. That became a huge part of that story.
In some ways, what Gwendolyn was doing felt taboo, but in other ways it seemed natural. With the people we interacted with, we were treated so warmly, and when Gwendolyn played in that initial game, it felt like any other game…but playing in the hijab was i think a constant reminder for G, that there were more forces at work. As filmmakers, we definitely wanted to make sure we made it out of the country with our footage. I spent a lot of sleepless nights dubbing tapes two and three times over, but at the end of the trip, i think they got the idea of what we were doing and we made it home with all the copies I had sweated over. We weren’t there to interview people about politics (although it is an unavoidable element of the story), we were there to get into games and see where it led us. Iran was one of the most soccer crazy countries we went to and they also were some of the nicest, most inviting people. I feel really lucky to have had that experience.
Obviously you knew soccer was a world sport, but were you surprised to see how deeply integrated it is in so many cultures?
Each new place we traveled to, especially once we got out of South America and Europe, I remember just being in awe of how popular soccer was. It was way beyond what we imagined when we started brainstorming the trip. Even on our trips to Asia and the Middle East we were finding games everywhere. And each place had its own favorite teams, favorite players, their own style, even their own slang vocabulary. One of the first things we would do when we arrived in a new place was figure out what that word for pick up was…bc we didnt want to be led to stadiums and league championships, we wanted to find the informal games. That ended up being the inspiration for the film’s title, “Pelada.” It’s Brazilian Portuguese for pickup, but also literally means naked or bare. Pelada’s double meaning took on another aspect for us. It embodied our search for the most bare form of the game, stripped down to its core.
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment Categories: SXSW 2010
5 Questions with … Steve James, director of ‘No Crossover: The Trial of Allen Iverson’
Here, we talk to Steve James (“Hoop Dreams”), director of the documentary “No Crossover: The Trial of Allen Iverson,” a look at one of the most controversial moments in the history of one of the NBA’s most controversial stars. James dissects the felony charge and subsequent trial of the high school aged Iverson, while highlighting the simmering racial tensions in America and challenging pre-conceived notions about the heavily tatted star. (In the spirit of the basketball Mighty Mouse who could always get to the rack, we did this 5 Questions, and-1 style, with six questions.)
“No Crossover: The Trial of Allen Iverson” screens at 11 a.m. March 14 at the Paramount Theatre and 2:45 p.m. March 19 at the G-Tech theater at the Austin Convention Center.
Statesman: Who approached you about doing the ESPN “30 For 30” series and how did you decide to focus on Allen Iverson? What other topics, if any, did you consider?
Steve James: I was first approached by John Sloss, who represents me and was serving as an advisor for the series. My first thought for a story was to do something on Dr. J, Julius Erving, who as a rookie, played for my hometown ABA team, the Virginia Squires. Watching the then-unknown Erving burst on to the scene was a, um, religious experience for me. But Erving’s rookie year was in the 70’s, too early for the series which focuses on stories that have happened in the last 30 years. So my second thought was Allen Iverson and the bowling alley brawl. I wasn’t living in Hampton, VA when it happened, but followed it through my parents and then the media. I realized something very significant was happening at that time, and it had to do with race, and sports, and the legal system. If I wasn’t knee deep in “Hoop Dreams” at the time, I would have gone home and started filming. So, 17 years later, ESPN gave me another chance to make this film.
Where on the continuum between best player inch-for-inch in history and selfish, un-coachable star do you think Allen Iverson falls? Or is there no answer?
Well, as the tag line for our poster says, there’s one Answer, but many opinions. I think what’s so fascinating about AI is that he is different things to different people. His grit and courage and toughness are without question, but in those same qualities, one can sometimes legitimately criticize him for selfishness as a player. I think Iverson is something of a Rashoman-like figure: how you view him says as much about you as it does about him.
What role, if any, did your late father play in your desire to make this movie? Was there a way in which making this film formed a deeper connection between you and him?
I think making the student film I made on him (and that’s featured some in this film) was what really formed a deeper connection. Maybe making this film was a way of resurrecting what he meant to me now that he’s gone. But I was very conscious of not trying to make this film too personal. I had no desire to hijack the story of Iverson and the trial in favor of my own story of growing up. I just hope that the personal parts help inform the viewer about my hometown and what it felt like to grow up there. Making this film certainly made me much more aware of my hometown’s history and the broader community. Playing basketball there in high school, I thought I knew more about the black community of Hampton than I did. This film was a real education for me, which is what I love about making documentaries.
Why do you think so many people refused to be interviewed for the film?
I think people have a hard time talking about race, and since this whole thing was prompted by a racial brawl, many people didn’t want to go back there and talk about what they were feeling or thinking at the time. It seems to me that race is indeed the “elephant in the room” as Pastor Marcellus Harris says in the film, but many of us would rather not talk about it. We worry, if we are white, that we might be perceived as racist if we speak candidly. And perhaps if you are black, you worry that people will accuse you of living in the past when there “really was racism.” And on a practical level, people refused to talk because they didn’t want it to affect how bosses and colleagues and fellow church members would view them. They wanted to put distance between that time and themselves.
Going into the making of the movie, did you have an opinion as to Iverson’s guilt or innocence in the case? If so, how did you remain objective? Do you care to share your thoughts as to his guilt or innocence?
Like most “liberal types”, I first expected — maybe even hoped — that I’d find that Iverson was innocent. During the making of the film, I went back and forth between thinking he was innocent or guilty. The reality we found was, the testimony on both sides was flawed. But what became clearer as we went along was that ultimately the real issue for me wasn’t guilt or innocence. That even if Iverson was guilty, the question is, was he treated fairly by the justice system? In the film, I weigh in on that one… But I’d rather you see the film then just read about it here, to find out what I think. And of course the other real issue was, why did Allen Iverson and this event so divide the community? And that’s really what the film is about.
Do you believe if Iverson and his fellow defendants were white that they would have received the same punishment?
I specifically address this question in the film… But I think part of the reason to watch the film is for the viewer to come to their own conclusions about this question. We really tried to make sure all voices were heard and that Allen’s supporters and detractors were fairly represented before I gave my opinion. And one of the interesting surprises was, though the community divided largely along lines of race over Allen Iverson, it was not exclusively so by any means. Because he also divided the community along lines of class.
“No Crossover: The Trial of Allen Iverson” screens at 11:00 AM on March 14 at the Paramount Theatre and again at the G-Tech theater at the Austin Convention Center on Friday, March 19 at 02:45 PM.
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment Categories: SXSW 2010
