Interview: The OCan24 Jurors

The Ottawa Canadian Film Festival announced the jury for the 2024 festival earlier this year.  Read their bios on the OCan website.  I asked Jury President Zachary Chabot and jurors Daniel Perras, Fitch Jean, and Nicole Bedford the same three questions.

What drew you to film in the first place?

Zachary: I grew up in Ontario in a French family. When I started going to elementary school, I knew little to no English. I started watching movies in English to teach me and overtime, not only did I learn how to speak English, but I fell in love with movies. I always wanted to give back to the industry that gave me a second language, and so many life opportunities.

Nicole: Like most filmmakers, I’ve been drawn to making films since I was a child. I used to think about becoming Hollywood’s next Steven Spielberg (because I didn’t know women directors at the time and I was constantly re-watching Schindler’s List, Jurassic Park, and Indiana Jones films). At the time, I was certain I’d go into fiction/narrative filmmaking. I wrote scripts regularly, and the films I made with friends were all narratives. When I got to the end of high school though, I went with the “safe” route and left the film dream on the back burner. I completed an undergrad and a masters, incorporating filmmaking in both degrees, and then started working in events and project management in academia. In 2019, I realized how long I’d neglected the film dream, and so, as my work contract came to an end, I saved up and jumped into film! Because of the more academic-y route I took to get here, I ended up with a keen interest in documentary. So the first five years of my career focused on doc work. This year, I’m expanding my practice and co-writing my first comedy web series with local filmmaker Deena Alsaweer. It’s been a ton of fun stretching my script-writing skills again!

Fitch: My passion for film ignited from a love of storytelling and the powerful impact visual narratives can have on audiences. Growing up in Haiti, I was surrounded by a rich tapestry of culture and history that was often expressed through local storytelling traditions. This backdrop instilled in me an appreciation for the art of storytelling, which later translated into a desire to explore and create within the medium of film. The possibility of weaving together visuals, dialogue, and music to evoke emotions and provoke thought was irresistibly compelling.

Daniel: I remember as a kid asking for my dad to drive me to the local movie theatre on Saturday afternoons. He would give me 50 cents to get in and I’d watch movies on my own. I clearly recall seeing Willy Wonka with Gene Wilder and loving it. Also, as a kid every Sunday late evening after the local newscast I would watch “Ciné-Club” on SRC and they would present repertoire films. I recall really getting the bug for repertoire cinema after watching the film “IF…” by Lindsay Anderson from 1968. To my astonishment, when I was up late one Sunday evening this year in January, I told my partner about being a kid and watching films late at night on SRC, and believe or not, Ciné-Club is still on years and years later!!! I could not believe it. We ended up watching “Portrait of a lady on Fire”… Incroyable!

Can you describe your process for reviewing films as part of the OCan jury?

Nicole: My process as a jury member is pretty straightforward: For the first review, I open a film and watch it full screen on my work computer (a video editing suite with colour-balanced screens and good speakers). I try my best not to look at the name of the filmmaker, the film description, or the ratings of the other jurors so as not to bias my initial watch. I watch the film from beginning to end, considering the audio/visual quality as well as the story. Story takes precedence for me: If the story is super compelling, then I’m more likely to rate the film higher, even if the audio/visual quality isn’t as great (although if the sound is awful, sorry, but I can’t overlook that!). Once I’ve watched the film through, I give it a rating. I always try to keep in mind the biases and preferences I might bring to a viewing so they don’t affect my rating (e.g. does a film move me emotionally because it’s a topic I already care about, or because it’s just a really great, emotion-inducing film?). If I come away confused by a film, I will read the provided film description to get a better understanding of the film before deciding on a rating. Two other factors I consider, though these factors matter less than the story and audio/visual quality: (1) Will the film stretch the audience’s viewing experience — in other words, does the film consider a perspective or use a visual/storytelling approach the audience hasn’t considered or seen? and (2) Will the film be likely to draw audiences? If the film does one of these two things (or both!), I rate it higher.

Zachary: As a jury member, my process tends to be based on multiple criteria but I’ve been able to simplify it into five categories: acting, lighting, sound, storytelling and, likeability.

Fitch: As a jury member, my process revolves around three key aspects: emotional impact, creativity, and execution. I begin by experiencing each film as any audience member might, allowing myself to be fully immersed in the story and its emotional pull. I then shift to a more analytical approach, assessing how creatively the story was told, including considerations of cinematography, screenplay, editing, and performances. Finally, I evaluate the execution: how well the film’s elements come together to fulfill the director’s vision and the narrative’s intent.

Daniel: My partner and I set aside a couple of hours each day. We sit down with a glass of wine and watch a few submissions. After each one, we discuss what we saw, what we liked, what we didn’t like, technical approach, content, etc. Then we discuss what we would score and why. Sometimes the discussion can become heated as we’re both passionate about movies.

What has been the most surprising thing about your experience as an OCan juror?

Nicole: The most surprising experience has probably been the number of film submissions! There are so many submissions received by this festival, and so many of them are quite good! The competition is high, so if your film is selected, you can be very proud of that OCan laurel on your film!

Zachary: I already knew Canada had loads of talented filmmakers, but I think the most surprising thing is the various types of stories we have to offer. I’ve learned new things, rediscovered memories, cried, laughed, hid-myself-in-a-pillow and been in awe at the stories told.

Fitch: The most surprising aspect has been the incredible diversity of perspectives and storytelling styles I’ve encountered. Each filmmaker brings their unique voice and background to their work, which has been both enlightening and inspiring. It’s a vivid reminder of the vast range of human experience and the myriad ways these can be expressed through film.

Daniel: I am often astonished by the different ideas and points of view presented by the submissions. There are some amazing jewels that are presented. These pieces often leave an indelible mark on your psyche and broaden your perspective on the world. Isn’t that what artists intend? I consider it a privilege to be able to view these artistic works.