Trouble Is My Business – an editor’s experience

Cushla Dillon provides her account of working on Juliette Veber’s
doco Trouble Is My Business currently screening at the
New Zealand International Film Festival.

When [director] Juliette [Veber] asked me to view the assembled edit for a documentary she was making, the cut was over three hours long.
I could see immediately that somewhere in that assemble was a compelling portrait of the students and assistant principal of Aorere College in South Auckland. The footage was packed with funny and heart-wrenching moments, but what stood out for me was that most of the pupils seemed oblivious to Juliette’s camera (she filmed on her own). Not only did the material have an understated intimacy, it felt like the pupils and their families knew their story needed to be told, and they trusted Juliette to do it.
Using Final Cut Pro, we then had to find a narrative on which we could hook the array of characters, interviews, and scenarios. With so much material (over 100 hours) this was always going to be an arduous task. Juliette did not approach the school knowing what kind of documentary she would be making, it was a matter of being present with the camera to record the daily goings on of a South Auckland school and trusting that a storyline would emerge.
This can be a risky approach but in Juliette’s case it paid off because Mr Peach, the assistant principal, proved to be such an active and influential character and Juliette was filming nearly every day for six months. It was pretty clear to both of us that Mr Peach would be the pivotal centre of the film, as it was in the relationship between the students and this very unique, passionate teacher, that we hear these students speak about the difficulties they face in both their school and home lives.
In the initial stages of the edit we looked for recurrent themes in the material, particularly around truancy, as Mr Peach spent a good deal of time and energy trying to get his students to come to school. But there were also several students Juliette had filmed who had particular issues that brought them into conflict with other students and figures of authority, and we wanted to incorporate them into the narrative as well. So it was a to-and-fro kind of process where we searched the material for themes that we then used to inform the narrative, which then informed another way of editing the characters’ stories.
Another process running parallel was the ordering of scenes. Every time we changed the order of events, it affected the narrative, which meant reshaping each scene. So there was a need to be open-minded and fluid about what the film was about, yet at the same time be very disciplined as to what the film was about at that particular stage of the process . Very tricky, and very time consuming. The edit required constant reordering, reshaping, watching down the assemble, scenes shifted around, new storylines added, deleting scenes, deleted scenes back in, deleted scenes back in being deleted again, watching down the film again. Disappointments, positive responses, two steps forward, followed by three steps back. And so many gems that never made it into the final cut.
Over a period of two years, editing on and off as our schedules allowed and facilities were available (Juliette was living in Wellington and I was in Auckland), we gradually shaped the narrative to focus on four pupils and Mr Peach. But the film Juliette wanted to make proved to be elusive. While there were significant social and cultural problems these children and their families faced, there was also a lot of strength, dignity and humour in their lives, reflected in their banter with Mr Peach and each other. We had to make sure this film represented both the joys and tribulations of their experiences.
Juliette had spent a year at Aorere College making this documentary, and in that time had developed friendships with both Mr Peach and many of the students. I’m sure Juliette would agree, but sometimes that proved to be problematic in the editing room where decisions are made based on serving the story and themes of the documentary. Exposing one person’s crisis is essential to prepare for the emotional journey of another character, so that each story was a counterpoint to the emotional heart of the documentary.
The obvious example of this was Mr Peach himself. Upon first seeing Mr Peach, the audience will read him based on their own experience of schooling, and will either be amused, repelled or intrigued by his unorthodox methods. But by the end of the film we wanted the audience to admire his achievements and passion for teaching.
During a crucial stage of the edit a screening was held for some of the participants, and it was noted that various low points of Mr Peach’s tenure weren’t present, and perhaps the film wasn’t reflecting the full picture. Even Mr Peach himself felt this to be a problem. There was footage that covered these issues, but the question was, if we revealed other less positive viewpoints of Mr Peach’s approach to dealing with the kids, how significantly would it alter our emotional journey through the film and our empathy towards him? And if it did change that relationship, would it be a good thing or a bad thing?
If you want the answer, then you’ll have to go and see the film.

© Copyright Onfilm magazine,
July 2008 www.onfilm.co.nz