Unwatchable

Black Jack Films directing duo DarkFibre have recently completed this extremely hard-hitting short film which looks to inform viewers about the attrocities taking place in the Congo, attrocities committed in the pursuit of minerals for mobile phones. The film is made in association with Save the Congo and has garnered, understandably, a huge amount of interest - both positive and negative - due to its content. Here DarkFibre discuss how the film came to be, what it hopes to achieve and how even shooting such dark scenes can affect those involved.

How did you get involved in this project?

We were given the testimony of Masika, the woman whose true story Unwatchable is based on, by Sam Roddick, Anita Roddick’s (founder of The Body Shop) daughter. It was sickening to read. Her daughters were raped while she was made to watch and then her husband was cut up and fed to her before they raped her over his dismembered body. When you read something like that its burnt into your brain. Masika survived and she has gone back into the jungle and saved over 2,000 victims who suffered a similar fate. So the story was shocking but also inspirational. I knew nothing at the time about what was going on in the Congo.

What was the brief that you received and from whom exactly did you receive it?

There was no real brief. What turned out to be the process was collaboration between digital strategist, Jon Baines, DarkFibre, Save The Congo and the principle creative team: Nick Lofting, David Arnold (score), Michael Bonvilain (DP) and Black Jack Films. Save The Congo are a small NGO, which meant that they were both courageous and open to develop the campaign together. We tried to get in other NGO’s as partners but they all ran away when they saw the film. While some remain completely supportive behind the scenes (and we link to them) they had to take an arms length position because of the content.

Was the idea for the film already in place when you came onboard or were you also involved in that?

We wrote the film. We were given Masika’s testimony and we responded with the script. It’s a simple suggestion to place what is happening over there, over here. We consciously chose a stereotypical stylised English rural setting. Maybe some people might feel its over simple. But our feeling is that people are so Africa’d out with images, that we had to find something that would be more disruptive, provoke more reaction.

Was there a conscious decision that you had to make it so hard-hitting to garner people’s attention?

Absolutely, yes. We knew that taking it so far would provoke such strong reaction. And this is important because we didn’t have the global structure of the big NGO’s, the film had to essentially ride on its own notoriety. 

But there was a more fundamental reason. We had to ask ourselves, how on earth could we create a piece of work that in any way stood up against what really happened to Masika? How could a campaign film express the monstrosity of the event? We couldn’t shy away from it. We didn’t want to. We decided to take the film as far as we could possibly take it. To find that line where the film is shocking and uncomfortable, but keep the viewer there, for them not to turn away from it.

But we also completely understand we have a responsibility as well. You can’t just go out there with this film. We didn’t put it on YouTube, its got warnings all over it; we got a BBFC 18 certificate (though the BBFC had to go into serious deliberations as their instinct at was not to allow it to be certified). Jon Bains, the digital strategist on the campaign took great pains to contextualise the film properly and to surround it with warnings. Of course the warnings are also double edged; they warn and they also intrigue.

Is it a hard message to get across that something as innocuous as a mobile phone can create such trauma and despair?

It is. It was a conscious decision to use the mobile phone rather than all electronic equipment. The intent was to personalise the issue with the viewer. We can’t possibly imagine being without our mobile phones. And to suggest there is a strong link between the phone in my pocket and atrocity in the Congo is a powerful one.

How intense was the shoot itself?

It was intense! I don’t think we all realised what an effect filming the rape scene would have on everyone. We all knew it was coming up on the last day of the shoot, so everyone got more and more nervous. We kept Thea who played the teenage girl (she had never acted before, we cast her in a Wagamama noodle bar) apart from the soldiers the whole time, so the first time they met was when the cameras were rolling. We shot the scene in one take, Thea couldn’t take any more. We had a support network in place for her post-filming [but] what we didn’t realise was the effect it would have on the soldiers, who were pretty traumatised by what they did. They just sat around on set alone, smoking and stuff. It was a closed set, but the rest of the crew could hear it all outside and the NGO watched on a monitor. Coming out from the filming was strange. Everyone was spooked out, looking at us strangely.

What was the hardest thing about shooting the film?

It was actually the little girl running from the helicopter. She was really frightened and it took her mum and Michael Bonvillain the DP to convince her it would be OK. And then we knew we would only have one take of it.

Have you ever done anything like this film before?

Not as intense as this. We have done spots for Amnesty international about waterboarding and stress positions – the use of torture techniques by the CIA in the so-called “war on terror”. These were pretty graphic, but there is something about witnessing rape, even though it was acted, by men in camo. It’s such a violation. Editing it was equally hard. We cut it in LA with supremo editor Nick Lofting. Ten days editing it was exhausting for both of us. The edit suite wasn’t great in soundproofing and the whole facility could hear the screams over and over again.

What do you hope the film will achieve?

Notoriety. That’s what it was designed to do. And through that to anger people. Shock people. Disgust people. Motivate people. Cut through the noise that surrounds us and, like a sledgehammer, present a glimpse of what it might be like to suffer such a fate. And through that to connect it all back to the mobile phones sitting inoccusly in our pockets. The film’s job is to gout there like an exocet missile. The campaigns job is to give a place for people to learn more and act.

Do you think it will do that?

Absolutely. The rage out there on the internet has been quite breathtaking. Its divided many people. Some support it, others hate it but they are all talking about it. The response on The Guardian Comment Is Free blog is the largest amount of responses the author has ever had.

Vava, the director of Save The Congo said the Congolese community he is part of are so happy that 100 years ago they would have made me an Honorary King, ha ha! This means a lot, its about the Congo and while many armchair critics are spewing out their bile, to have that community steadfastly behind it is the most important thing for me.