Mauro Andrizzi and Marcus Lindeen Co-directors of Accidentes Gloriosos

How did you come up with the idea for the film?

ML: It all started when we watched Steven Sodenbergh’s And Everything Is Going Fine, a documentary on actor Spalding Gray. Gray mentions this concept of going through a ‘glorious accident’ by being physically injured - an incident that made him see life in a different way. Soon after this, we started fantasising about a glorious accident - not just an epiphany that might ccur when you are close to death - but an accident with a more mysterious element attached to it that can make you question reality.

Tabloid news clips were also one of your resources for the script.

ML: I come from a journalistic background and I also work as a theatre director. Tabloid news clips have been a huge inspiration for a long time and I have kept an archive. When I met with Mauro in Copenhagen we had this discussion about where we derive our ideas from. News headlines came up, we exchanged stories and things took off from there.

MA: This exchange did not only serve screenwriting purposes, but it also gave us the opportunity to get to know each other.

How did you work together? Did you maintain a sort of ‘long distance relationshipship’?

ML: It was pretty much a long distance thing (laughs). We first met in Copenhagen, where we spent a week speaking to advisors and attending lectures by philosophers, mathematicians, neurologists and filmmakers.

MA: It was a very stimulating process. However, when we returned to our countries, time difference was an obstacle. It was only until Marcus arrived in Argentina that the communication flew and the real work began. We started writing, producing and shooting the film at the same time.

Did you experience any cultural differences in the filmmaking approach?

ML: Not really. I guess that is what one would expect from this type of project. Coming out of this process, we both agreed that culture clash is a myth. Modern filmmaking has reached a level where it almost looks the same all over the world. Young people travel and connect through the internet. We are more alike than we are different. That said, I also think we have been lucky. Things could turn into a disaster, considering one is meant to work with a director that he didn’t chose himself. He could feel threatened artistically. Thankfully we are both open-minded and we embraced each other’s ideas from the beginning.

MA: If you are smart enough, when you recognise a good idea – even if it is not yours – you have to take it. Why not? I believe in artistic differences, not cultural ones.

You have both experimented with documentary in your previous films. Do you consider the genre a medium for truth-telling or a tool to manipulate ideas?

ML: I do not believe in objective documentary making. A film might strive to be objective, but as soon as shooting and editing are involved, the truth is lost. Anyhow, we are moving to a direction where this discussion will not be of interest. CPH: DOX for example is a documentary festival that has progressed into the 2.0 field. In 2009 they awarded Trash Humpers, which is an avant-garde drama rather than a documentary.

MA: I agree. There are more and more documentary festivals that screen pure fiction films. ‘Documentary’ as a label is disappearing. Who cares about the truth anymore? Let’s leave that for journalists. As filmmakers, we are not meant to deal with truth.

by Eftihia Stefanidi