Hello. Elston Gunn here. Over the weekend, I watched JUNE 17, 1994, a film directed by Brett Morgen (THE KID STAYS IN THE PICTURE, CHICAGO 10) for ESPN’s 30 FOR 30 documentary series, which celebrates the channel’s thirtieth anniversary (thirty filmmakers, thirty stories from 1979 – 2009). Morgen’s film is a triumph, an affecting doc that felt like anything but your typical sports documentary. And it had me wondering why I’ve seen very little press on this series, much less this particular film (with one exception being Slant/The Cooler’s Jason Bellamy, who has been a faithful viewer and reviewer of 30 FOR 30). The documentaries have been airing on ESPN’s channels since October. Contributions by Peter Berg, Steve James, Albert Maysles, Dan Klores, Barry Levinson, Ice Cube and many others have proven to be fascinating, illuminating and surprisingly refreshing works, as each director does something completely different. This isn’t one of those cases where a well-known filmmaker directs an episode of a show, but you would never know it because it looks like every other episode of said show. The artists are allowed to bring their art to it. If you’ve not yet been introduced to the series, JUNE 17, 1994 is an ideal starting point as it focuses on a single day and an event many will no doubt remember – a turning point in our culture, Morgen argues. Furthermore, it involves several other simultaneous sports moments, not to mention strange and wonderful examples of human behavior. Fortunately for you, it airs again Wednesday, June 30, at 11pm (EST) on ESPN 2. Check it out. It’s likely to be one of the best films you’ll see this year. You can also visit the series’ official website (for schedule information, clips and a list of 30 FOR 30 films past, present and future. Don’t receive any of the channels? Many of these films are, or will be, available at iTunes, Amazon and Netflix. (I’ve heard wonderful things about THE TWO ESCOBARS, which I missed last week.) The rest of the year will see 30 FOR 30 films by Alex Gibney, Spike Jonze, Barbara Kopple, Frank Marshall, Ron Shelton and John Singleton, just to name a few. Set your DVRs. And for those who are turned off by the mere mention of “ESPN” or “sports,” take heed: You do not have to be a sports fan to enjoy these films, only a lover of good stories by great storytellers. Thanks to ESPN for showcasing these stories and encouraging filmmakers to tell them in their own way. What a great idea. Morgen took time on very short notice to answer some questions for AICN. [Elston Gunn]: Had you been conscious of how these stories converged on this date for some time? What was the impetus for your making JUNE 17, 1994? [Brett Morgen]: ESPN approached me with the idea of doing a film about one day in sports. It didn't take long to land on June 17, 1994. Personally, I knew about the OJ chase and the NBA Finals happening at the same time, but forgot that the World Cup, Stanley Cup, and US Open were all happening as well. My idea was to try and find one day that would put every emotion we associate with Sports on a singular stage. From conception, I decided not to do any interviews, re-enactments, or digital enhancements and simply make the film from existing footage. In many ways, it was just free association, I often felt like I was the audiences' remote control for the day. [EG]: Have you been following the 30 FOR 30 series and what some of the other filmmakers have been doing? [BM]: I've tried to watch as many as I can. The thing about the series that makes it so unique is that there is no formula in place. Each filmmaker is encouraged to make their film as personal and unique as they can. In this sense, it's totally different than other doc series like AMERICAN EXPERIENCE or HBO SPORTS. Stylistically, you're going to get a different film every week. THE TWO ESCOBARS looks nothing like SILLY LITTLE GAME which looks nothing like JUNE 17, 1994. [EG]: How important are "experimental" and "experiential" to you in terms of filmmaking? And is it harder to find support and/or funding even for documentaries that stray from unconventional approaches, like the absence of narration or talking heads? [BM]: I want all of my films to be experiential, and by that I mean, I want to offer the audience an "experience" something that is uniquely cinematic. That's one of the reasons I avoid talking heads; they're kind of like still lifes, nothing is moving but we're in a cinema. In every moment, I like to ask myself how can I exploit the medium of film to make this moment uniquely cinematic. There are dozens of books one can read about the riots in Chicago or the OJ Simpson chase, but I want to give the audience "the experience" of being there. All of my films have been a little different. My feeling is if people are going to spend $10 to see a film, you've got to give them something that they can't get at home for free on TV. If I included interviews with THE KID it would be an E TRUE HOLLYWOOD STORY. If I put interviews in CHICAGO 10, it would become an episode of AMERICAN EXPERIENCE, and if I put interviews on the OJ film, it would be totally forgettable. So, I've never tried to get financing for a "straight" (whatever that means) doc. JUNE 17,1994 was commissioned by ESPN. There was no negotiation. They offered the same number, more or less, to every filmmaker. [EG]: What was it like for you not to have to animate or manipulate photographs this time around; instead using the electric images, sounds and emotions inherent to sports? [BM]: I approach each film with the idea that content will dictate form. THE KID STAYS IN THE PICTURE needed to be told with stills for a number of reasons, one of which happened to be the fact that there was surprisingly little film on Bob. I mean nothing. A few minutes at best. With CHICAGO 10, I didn't have any footage of the trial and wanted to make a "yippie" film, so animation seemed appropriate. With this film, I knew that photo animation would just come across as a cheap gimmick. I wanted to make a film out of the scraps and outtakes from that day - take other people's discarded material and turn it into something new. At some point, I contemplated doing a title sequence in after effects but then came to the conclusion that it would announce a style that I would never adopt and therefore wouldn't work. When you go outside the norms of the genre, I think it's important to establish the style immediately for the audience. This was intended to be a film that felt free of manipulation and gimmickry. I felt like the footage dictated the style. I mean, what can be more dramatic than a guy driving down the highway with a gun to his head negotiating with the cops? No photographs or animation was needed. I think ESPN was thinking that I would use photoanimation at some point since I've done that in the past. But I never want to make the same film twice, so it's doubtful that I would ever do a film like THE KID or CHICAGO. I will say it was a relief not to have to do a shit load of post. I was still "cutting" CHICAGO 10 a year after we locked picture due to animation. It was great to lock picture for once and be close to the finish line. [EG]: Could you talk a little bit about the logistics of a project like this? Did you have a general outline of the structure even before you start viewing footage? Did you at one time have, say, a five hour cut that you would just distill, distill, distill while making sure the whole film builds and builds? [BM]: I started with the idea of just following the narrative of the day. With that approach, Andy Grieve, the editor, was able to put an assembly together in about six weeks. I expected a four hour assembly edit and Andy delivered a really good 85 minute version of the film. We then spent another five months refining it. I knew that I wanted all of the transitions to be really strong and dreamy. The film employed a fair amount of Eisensteinian montage, so it was critical that we find transitions that worked both thematically as well as structurally. A film like this is all about precision. Since we didn't shoot anything ourselves, I wanted to make sure that each edit was as strong as possible. The moment for me when things really started clicking was when we brought Jeff Danna, the composer, in. I approached JUNE 17, 1994 and THE KID STAYS IN THE PICTURE as operas with music running almost continuously throughout, often with repeating verses and themes. I told our mixer to put Jeff on top of everything and allow all of the other design and production tracks to work around him. When one makes a film out of archival elements, the director only has a few places to make their mark and for me, that means sound design, color correct, score, and editing. All of these elements need to be working in perfect harmony. Jeff's score for the film really represents our collective voice (Jeff, Andy and myself). [EG]: Was there anything in particular that you lost that you might have second guessed or wished you would have been able to keep? [BM]: Not really. [EG]: How many hours of footage did you go through? [BM]: I wish I had a great war story and I could tell you that I went through thousands of hours of footage, but that wasn't really the case here. We were making a film about one day and therefore tried to get our hands on everything that was shot on that one particular day, but it was a manageable amount. [EG]: Was it difficult to access some of this footage? [BM]: Most of the leagues (NFL, NBA, FIFA) own all of the rights to their broadcasts so it's pretty difficult to negotiate. It's not like we had a back up plan. As a result, the archival budget for this film was larger than THE KID STAYS IN THE PICTURE or CHICAGO 10, despite the fact that I didn't need theatrical rights. [EG]: It is fascinating to me how the film brings out ideas of reality TV and celebrity culture while at times itself playing like a scripted and staged Hollywood feature with action shots, dramatic press conferences, a chase scene. [BM]: I really wanted the film to play like a thriller. In a way, I want all of my non-fiction films to play like pieces of popular cinema. That's one of the reasons I eschew talking heads and narration. This is something that I've obsessed on since I was in college in the 90's. The first film I released theatrically, ON THE ROPES, was intended from conception to play like a piece of fiction, same with THE KID, CHICAGO 10, and JUNE 17. A lot of people who work in documentary come from a background in anthropology or journalism. I'm not a historian or a journalist, my background is cinema. I don't think of my work as documentary, it's more like mythumentary... it's liberating to think of these films more as myth than documentary. People expect a documentary to be one kind of thing, and I don't really like to play by the rules. [EG]: Any facts or moments you were unaware of that really stood out? [BM]: The Arnold Palmer story really surprised and inspired me. I don't know a thing about golf or Arnold outside of the fact that he has a drink named after him, but in his story, I saw the potential to tell a much bigger story about mortality, and gracefully coming to terms with one's mortality. It's devastating to watch footage of him as a young man and contrast that with his showing at the 1994 Open. [EG]: What kind of pragmatic advice do you have for aspiring editors and directors that you learned from this project? [BM]: Making a film without narration or interviews is kind of like walking a tightrope without a safety net. Make sure you know what you're doing 'cause if you fuck up, it can be devastating. Other than that, I really try and encourage anyone working in non-fiction to try and think outside the box. Non-fiction is a liberating genre, there are very few rules anymore, it's kind of like the Wild West, anything goes... animation, re-enactments, interviews, whatever. [EG]: Speaking of seminal moments of 1994, are you still working on a Kurt Cobain documentary? How is that coming along? [BM]: It's taken a long time to put all of the rights together but that film will get made... eventually. 11 p.m. Wednesday. ESPN2 Elston Gunn elstongunn@hotmail.com

The Best Superman Stories In Decades!!

70 Blu-rays Under $10!!