>> (on radio): If securing the
peace in Iraq is impossible,
which after nearly four years
it clearly is,
I don't see
how compartmentalizing
the country is the answer.
The United States needs to
immediately begin withdrawing
troops from Iraq,
a country in the throes
of a civil war...
( car passing by loudly )
...and constantly aggravated
by the actions and presence
of our own government.
That is the reality.
( car passing by loudly )
...immediate action,
the cessation
of more lives lost.
>> Mr. Canin, you see
a political solution...
( explosion and man screaming )
Fighting begets fighting...
( explosions continue )
... Open the doors
of negotiation...
( loud screeching or screaming )
...including Syria and Iraq.
>> Hi, Welcome
to Director's Cut.
I'm your host,
Charles Monroe-Kane.
Here at Director's Cut,
we're dedicated to bringing you
the best in independent films
and filmmakers.
Our film today is called
"Madison."
The film tells the story
of a war correspondent
named Michael,
who's suffering from PTSD
after four years
of covering the war in Iraq.
It's Christmastime, and Michael
returns to Madison, Wisconsin,
where he went to college.
In search of his lost idealism,
and for some solace
from the chaos of war.
The film is slow-moving,
often quiet,
and very intense.
"Madison" was written
and directed by our guest today,
Brent Notbohm.
Brent, amazing film.
Thank you very much
for being here.
>> Thanks, it's nice to be here.
>> You know, I've watched a lot
of films about the Iraq war,
documentaries and films,
and they always
focus on the soldier,
or the people in Iraq.
But you focused on a
war correspondent named Michael.
Why that choice?
>> It was the point of view
that I felt I understood
the best.
You know, I'm not a veteran
of the Iraq war.
I have not been to Iraq.
And yet, I still wanted
to make a film about
what I understood
was going on over there,
at least the emotional impact
that war was having,
potentially on the people there,
and trying to come to
some sense of understanding
for myself about the war.
And I asked myself, who it is
that I understand
the war through.
Who is the conduit for
my understanding of the events
that were happening over there.
And it was the journalist.
And so, that was the genesis
of the project, really,
was to think about
what happens if the journalist
has seen too much.
What happens if the person
that I'm accustomed
to experiencing the war through,
what happens if that person
has seen way beyond what they're
able to communicate any more?
And so, that's
really where I started
as I developed the project.
>> You set it
in Madison, Wisconsin.
Why Madison?
>> Well, I'm from
the Madison area.
>> That's a good reason.
>> And Madison is a town
that I've always associated
with my own political awakening.
The first time I ever heard
the "Dead Kennedys"
was in Madison,
or "Black Flag," you know,
the first time I ever knew
what punk music was.
And the first time I ever
really understood
what an anti-war movement was,
was something I related
very specifically
to the city of Madison.
And you know, with the
documentary, "The War at Home,"
for example, and the things
that happened in Madison
in the '60s,
which I learned as a kid.
It is a city that's always
stood for this sense
of idealism,
of political awareness,
of political change.
>> Do you think that's a symbol
outside of Wisconsin, as well?
Do you think someone in Iowa
that's watching this film,
or California, do they
also see Madison, Wisconsin
as this oasis symbol as well?
>> You know, that
I'm not entirely sure of.
I think for me,
as I developed the project,
that was the basis for it.
I don't think
that to appreciate the film
you have to have that
understanding of Madison.
>> Right.
>> You know, Madison is,
I think it's a little bit less
about the city
and more about the idea.
Madison, to me, in the film,
is very much an idea.
It is a place
where you can change the world,
and where people believe
that they can change the world.
And in that sense,
I suppose maybe Madison natives
would think
that's a little idealistic.
That's the intention I have.
I think, you know, as so many
college freshman come to Madison
and have their own political
awakenings, that they believe
they can make that difference.
And it was that sense
of idealism that is at the heart
of my use of Madison,
or the setting of Madison
in the film.
>> That sets up our next clip
really well.
Set it up for us.
The next clip is the three main
characters playing pool in a bar
that I actually go to
all the time to eat burgers.
But tell me a little bit
about why you chose this.
What's up with this scene?
>> The characters in Madison,
the three primary characters
of Michael, Ben and Ash,
really represent
three different points of view.
Three different
points of view that I think
are struggling throughout
the course of the film
to understand one another.
Michael is very cynical.
He's devastated
by the experiences
that he has seen in Iraq.
Ben is just the opposite.
Ben reflects a sense of hope.
Not an innocent naive hope,
but a hope that comes through
the difficulties of life,
but still believing that
things are going to work out.
And Ash is the idealist.
Ash is the one who
really believes that he can
truly make a difference.
Each of the characters, those
three characters in Madison,
really all kind of come from
my own feelings
on any given day.
You know, the days that I--
I try to take those feelings
and put them into
these characters in the film,
and let them intermingle
with one another.
So the scene that you're
going to see is an example
of that intersection
of these three different visions
of the world.
>> Let's roll the clip.
>> But that doesn't help me
achieve my goal.
>> Your goal?
>> To change the world.
>> Yeah? What's your plan?
>> I'm not quite sure yet.
But you gotta admit,
it's an awesome goal.
? ?
The cultural revolution.
>> What's that?
>> There's gotta be
a cultural revolution.
I mean, those in power
have too much of it.
They have the ability to blow up
entire cities with their nukes,
for Christ's sake.
A traditional revolution
is no longer possible
in a technologically
advanced society,
where the power elite
have all the big guns
and the media.
Progressive change
must happen culturally.
>> You're from California?
>> Yeah.
>> What do your parents do?
>> My dad's a banker.
And my mother teaches
high school English.
>> Tough life.
>> What?!
>> Did you ever notice that
all the American revolutionaries
these days happen to be
middle class white kids?
>> It was the same thing
when we were in school.
>> You know, I've heard that
you'll think differently
when you're older before.
And I must say, you old guys
are really doing a bang-up job.
The middle class is shrinking.
The environment
is going to hell.
Don't even get me started
about education.
>> All right, good point.
>> Thank you.
>> Seriously, things
really aren't that bad.
I mean, there are problems,
sure.
But we live in a better world
today than we did
30 or 40 years ago.
>> We do?
No, I've got to agree
with the kid on this one.
>> Don't agree with me
if that's the way
you feel about it.
Things are bad,
but we can change them.
We have to.
>> Again, I ask you, how?
>> You tell me.
? ?
>> How about a toast?
>> To being (no audio).
>> To progressive change.
>> To both.
>> All: To both.
>> You're watching
Director's Cut, the show
that brings you the best
in Wisconsin independent films
and filmmakers.
That was just a clip
from the film, "Madison."
You know, Brent, when I watched
that clip, and you were talking
about that being your own
internal dialogue, absolutely.
I remember being
that college student.
I was totally him.
There was no way.
Then, I was much more cynical,
I think, as I got older.
And I'm feeling a little bit
like Ben, which is kind of nice,
more hope.
What was it like writing that?
I mean, you're the screenwriter
of this film, as well.
So you had to go through
the anguish to write it, right?
>> You know, it's interesting.
That's a great question.
When I start a project,
I often start
from a position of anger.
This film absolutely
started with me
just being incredibly angry,
and wanting to do something
about what I saw
as being a tremendous injustice.
You know, in America's
involvement in this war
that I believe was just wrong.
And so that, you know,
that was the idea.
And then, thinking about
Michael, as Michael emerges,
I mean, Michael is me
on more days than not,
in that sense of cynicism.
Then there are moments
in my own existence
where I truly believe
we can make a difference.
That's always been
a key part of me.
I love the Bob Dylan quote,
"I was so much older then;
I'm younger than that now."
And the idea that
we often think that young people
are naive and silly,
and that as we get older,
we get cynical.
And you know,
I'm a college professor.
That's something that
I battle with today, as well.
My own cynicism with my students
and their belief.
I actually very often identify
with their sense of the ability
to be able to change things
throughout.
So that was, you know,
all of those things
were kind of converging at once.
I think, as you actually
write characters
from those points of view,
I really felt like
it was easy for me.
There were times where those
two characters in particular
seemed to come out,
because they really did reflect
the feelings that I did have,
not just about the war,
but throughout
the course of my life.
Ben was a harder character
for me, because I'm not
that hopeful very often.
So, Ben was the most challenging
character for me to write.
And I think I still struggle
with that character in the film
to this day.
Brian did a fantastic job.
I do look at the film now, and
think I got close to what that
character really means to me,
but I'm not sure I touched it.
It's the character
I understood the least.
>> Maybe in 15 years,
when you have more hope.
>> I hope so.
>> Maybe the world will change.
>> The last line of the film,
right?
>> You know,
Ben has a sub-character.
There's a sub-character
in the film.
And it's Ben's
eight-year-old daughter, Maddie.
And there's a great moment
where Ben kind of manipulates
the situation--
Michael is staying with them--
To make sure Maddie and Michael
get some time alone together.
It happens to be
on Christmas Eve.
Tell me a little bit about
Maddie, about the character,
why she's in there.
And tell me a little bit about
that moment, where they're alone
on Christmas Eve.
>> I think one of the big things
about being--
You know, in our society,
we think children
are sometimes stupid.
And you know,
I have a nephew and two nieces.
And every moment
I've ever spent with them
has told me otherwise.
And they really, in many ways,
have had a profound influence
on me as a human being,
not just as a filmmaker.
This idea that, not only
the sort of cliche concept that
children represent the future,
and Maddie clearly does
represent this idea
of the future, and
of Madison itself, potentially.
But even more so, that the
questions children ask are
the most important questions.
And that they have a capacity
to understand things way beyond
we adults often give them credit
for.
So when I wrote this character
of Maddie, I really wanted her
to not just
speak about the future,
be the future,
represent the future.
Not speak about it,
but be the future.
But I also thought that it
would not be in some
silly childish kind of way.
But that she would have
the profound sensibility
that I've experienced in my life
interacting with children.
They'll say something
and you'll be like,
"Wow, that was incredible
that you said that."
I do feel like the scene that
we're going to see here
in just a second, is perhaps
one of my favorite scenes
in the film, just because she is
so magnetic in her performance.
Sophia, who's playing this scene
with her father, Jim.
And what is said in this scene,
to me, as a person,
has always moved me very much.
Now, this was a character
that wasn't me.
This was a character
that was about my experience
with children.
>> Let's see the clip.
>> What do you like to play?
>> I don't know.
What do you want to play?
>> I don't know.
>> Where did you come from?
>> I live in New York City.
But the last few years,
I've been in the Middle East,
in Iraq.
>> The war place?
>> Yes.
>> Are you in the Army?
>> No, I write for a newspaper.
>> Sue's son is in the Army.
He's been to Iraq, too.
She had a party for him,
and I got to go.
What's war like?
>> War is...
complicated, sad.
People die.
>> My mom died.
>> I know.
I'm sorry.
>> Did you know her?
>> Yeah, a little.
I was at your parents' wedding.
>> That's before I was born.
My dad said
it was a beautiful wedding.
>> Yes, it was.
>> Are there kids in war?
>> Yes, there are children
in Iraq.
>> What do they play?
>> I don't know.
But it's different than here.
>> How?
>> Everybody's afraid
all the time.
>> Of what?
>> Of dying.
So, what do you want to play?
>> Don't worry, Michael,
we don't have to play war.
>> That is a powerful moment
of filmmaking.
And it brings up
all sorts of questions.
But to me, it brings up
a filmmaking question.
You don't need a $20 million
budget to do that scene.
You're an independent filmmaker.
Limited budget.
Limited time frame.
But yet, you can still make
that art.
Do you need--
Is that good or bad, though,
in the end, for the art,
for the independent filmmaker
to have such a limited
time frame and a limited budget?
Would you have rather had
a little bit more?
Would it be better
to have the $20 million?
>> You know, there isn't a scene
in Madison that we shot
that I did not at one point say,
"I wish I could do
another take."
When you're making films
with a limited budget, like
we had in making "Madison,"
you have to understand
that there's a threshold.
Do you have it?
Do you have what it is you're
looking for in this scene?
Yeah, maybe there's a tick,
a moment or a slight move
of the camera, whatever,
that you would like to cover.
But it may take
ten more takes to do that.
And you're doing
25 or 35 setups a day.
It's incredibly challenging
to shoot this film.
We shot it in two weeks.
The entire film in two weeks.
>> Gosh.
>> It was incredibly
challenging.
You know, I look at the scenes
that I like the least.
And we shot them all
at the end of the day.
I can see my fatigue
as a director
in those particular scenes.
That said, all the money
in the world doesn't equate,
as we well know,
watching Hollywood movies,
to making engaging, provocative,
interesting movies.
And I think that
one of the things that
sometimes filmmakers buy into
is this belief that you've
got to have all this money
to have something to say,
to create a film,
to make a film,
to be involved with characters,
and their story,
and to speak about something
in our world.
And I think that
that's a lot of crap.
You know, certainly,
you need some money.
You know, certainly,
production value is important.
I feel like we really did that,
given the nature of our budget.
But at the same time, I do think
that we tend to overplay
this idea that we have to have
all this money to do
all this stuff, or otherwise
we can't do it at all.
It's so all or nothing.
And I think that's crippling
for independent filmmakers
to sort of buy into
that Hollywood mentality.
>> Sure, yeah.
It was interesting.
I was thinking about your film.
This film got
a lot of critical acclaim.
It got, you know, Sundance.
These things happened
to this film.
It won the awards.
It's very celebrated.
What's next for you with that?
Is the goal, then, to take this
and then go to Hollywood?
Is that for you personally?
Or is the goal in general,
okay, that's it,
I want to go to Hollywood now
and be a screenwriter
and write films.
Is that the goal?
>> It is not.
You know,
I'm a college professor.
And I love the classroom.
It is really where
characters like Ash, you know,
sort of emerge in my own psyche.
There's a professor character,
who I see idealistically
as me 25 or 30 years from now
in the film, as well.
But I'm not
a Hollywood filmmaker.
I will never be
a Hollywood filmmaker.
You know, if Hollywood
wants to give me, you know,
X amount of dollars
to make a film, my film,
the film I want to make, great.
I'll take advantage of that
if that opportunity ever arises.
But to me,
I'm not into filmmaking
to make a lot of money
and, you know, get my picture
on the cover of a magazine,
or something.
I'm in it because I have stories
that I want to tell, and ideas
that I want to relate to.
I'm politically oriented,
so I think my films deal with
issues that we face
as a society.
I'm not about trying to provide
answers for the major issues
of our society.
But I think as a filmmaker,
a role that I play is to
ask some important questions,
questions that I don't think
often get asked.
And I think "Madison"
is a great example of that.
So, I love the camaraderie
of independent filmmaking.
I love the idea that
we are not being controlled,
maybe that's the wrong word,
my Orwellian universe,
by the forces of economics,
and so forth.
There's a tremendous amount
of freedom, in terms of what
a film can be
in independent film, or at least
potentially an independent film
with those filmmakers who
don't buy into the restrictions
of the formulas, and the
homogenized stylistic elements
of Hollywood filmmaking,
or even pseudo
Hollywood filmmaking,
which seems to infect
a lot of independent films.
>> There's a clip
I want to show.
It's a little bit
of a longer clip.
It's very powerful.
One of the things I like about
the clip is it's pretty much
the camera sitting there
on Michael telling a story.
But it's written perfectly.
And you don't need a big budget
to do this kind of clip.
But it shows the power
of what you do.
And I think this clip
kind of speaks for itself.
So let's roll yet another clip
from "Madison."
>> After Baghdad was liberated,
I met a family.
They lived near my hotel
in a neighborhood
that hadn't been bombed
too badly.
They were really kind to me.
They spoke pretty good English,
and they had me over to dinner
a lot.
They gave me these great
insights into Iraqi culture
and society.
The man's name was Ahmed.
He was a school teacher.
His wife was Hayfa.
They weren't any big fans
of Saddam, either.
Hayfa's uncle had been in prison
for something political.
Anyway,
they had a daughter, Kareema.
She was maybe eight.
She was this beautiful
little girl.
Tiny.
Black hair.
And one day, near the end
of a so-called major military
operation, she was out playing.
And she found this thing.
It was shaped like a bell,
like a toy.
She got all excited about it.
She ran home to show her mother.
They were looking at it
on the kitchen table
when it blew up.
Hayfa was killed instantly.
Kareema was still alive
when her dad got home.
She'd been lying next to
what was left of the mother
for hours.
Ahmed drove her to the hospital.
It's an awful place.
There's no beds.
There's no medical supplies.
They got lucky
and found a doctor to treat her.
They amputated both her hands
and her right leg.
But there was no anesthetic,
no painkillers.
She lived like that
for two days.
I was with Ahmed when she died.
This beautiful little girl.
She was reduced to charred flesh
and bloody bandages.
Kareema could have grown up
to do great things.
Cured AIDS.
Been a teacher, a doctor.
She could've changed the world.
Now we'll never know.
The world will never be changed.
>> I read that.
It was very powerful.
>> It makes great copy.
It's won me much acclaim.
Good news doesn't save lives.
Bad news wins awards.
>> That was a powerful clip
from the film, "Madison."
You know, when I watch
that clip and hear that story,
it reminds you of the power
of first-person narrative.
Where did that story come from?
>> You know, it is a story
that's largely a work
of fiction.
However, I read, in my research
for the film, many stories
that were equally as powerful,
often about children.
So, all the stories in the film
are not direct quotes
from any source.
But they are very much like
many of the stories that I read
by some of the alternative
journalists that were actually
reporting the things that were
happening to the Iraqi people,
instead of just what we,
the American troops, were doing.
>> I was watching this film,
and had some expectations
going into it.
It's really a story about
chaos and war, and him
dealing with the chaos of war.
But then the film's
fairly quiet.
There's a lot of silence.
There's a lot of times,
very few people,
even in bar scenes.
Not what you expect
from a war about chaos.
What is the role of stillness
and silence in your film?
>> First of all, I think
aesthetically speaking,
that contemporary style
has a tendency to marginalize
the content of the film.
I mean, it spices it up and
makes it exciting, and so forth.
You know, if you do a lot
of quick cutting
and hand-held camera work,
and that sort of thing.
I didn't feel like those
were appropriate choices,
given what the subject
of this film was all about.
I also think that films
can be stylistically
not just what is
the contemporary "style."
And you know,
that form and content,
to use kind of a cliche,
can synthesize, depending on
whatever the content is,
and whatever your ideas about
the form of the film might be.
So, to me, it was a somber film,
like you mentioned
in your opening, about solace.
And to be about solace, to me,
was to be quiet,
to be reflective,
to be thought provoking,
but not in a way
that's in your face.
But rather, that you walk away
thinking about what
you experienced in your own way,
either relating to it or not.
I feel like style
in so many films today,
especially style
on some rather serious subjects,
is so in your face.
You know, cue the John Williams'
music, or whatever, that it
doesn't give us that space
as audience members
to interact with the film
in a way that is more dynamic
to me.
And as a filmmaker, I mean,
obviously, I'm very influenced
by European filmmaking,
especially European filmmaking
of the '60s.
I felt like those films let us
do that in a way that a lot
of contemporary films don't.
So, that was at the heart of the
style of this film, you know,
based on the subject matter,
but also based on this idea
that the audience
will interact with it in a way
that is, I feel, more liberating
than simply in your face,
this is what you should
think about war, Madison,
or these characters,
or anything emotionally.
>> Like I said in the talk,
I've seen a lot of documentaries
and films about the war.
I think this is a good
contribution to the debate.
I think it does help
respect that we all have
different opinions inside of us.
Are you pro-war or not?
Well, it's a little bit
more complicated than that.
I really respect that.
And I really,
really like the film.
So thank you very much.
I hope you make another film
and you come back on.
>> That sounds great.
Thank you.
>> Thank you very much.
Thank you, Brent, of course,
for joining us today.
And thank you all
for watching Director's Cut.
For more information on
"Madison," or any of the films
featured on our show,
please go to:
wpt.org/directorscut
While you're there,
send us an email.
We would love to hear from you.
I'm your host,
Charles Monroe-Kane.
And for everyone here
at Director's Cut,
thank you for joining us.
Check the gate.