SLIFF 2016 Interview: Beatrice Alda and Jennifer Brooke – Directors of LEGS: A BIG ISSUE IN A SMALL TOWN

LEGS: A BIG ISSUE IN A SMALL TOWN screens Friday, Nov. 4 at 7:30pm at .ZACK (3224 Locust Ave). Co-directors Beatrice Alda and Jennifer Brooke will be in attendance. Ticket information can be found HERE

Set in Sag Harbor, a small, frozen-in-time village in the tony Hamptons, LEGS: A BIG ISSUE IN A SMALL TOWN recounts the controversy that results when a local gallery  owned by Ruth Vered and  Janet Lehr installs Larry Rivers’ large sculpture of a woman’s legs. Because the artwork is attached to the side of a building, local officials deem it a “structure” — equivalent to a garage or shed — and declare that the owners are in violation of the town’s zoning code. Using a chorus of voices with differing perspectives, the film engages in a lively discussion of public art but also widens its view to encompass a whole range of interesting issues: upholding tradition vs. embracing change, small-town locals vs. summer visitors, long-time residents vs. recent arrivals. And although everyone in Sag Harbor is relatively wealthy, the documentary also smartly explores issues of inclusion from the perspectives of race, gender, and sexual orientation. Unfolding like a long, fascinating conversation, LEGS: A BIG ISSUE IN A SMALL TOWN employs an impressive array of talking heads, folks who prove wonderfully articulate and often quite eccentric (the gallery co-owners preeminently). A few of the residents interviewed are well known — art-world power couple Eric Fischl and April Gornik, guitarist G.E. Smith (who also contributes the soundtrack) — but the film offers a real diversity of viewpoints and refuses to demonize anyone.LEGS: A BIG ISSUE IN A SMALL TOWN ends before the case is fully litigated, but as one of the subjects makes clear, the discussion is just as important as the resolution.

LEGS: A BIG ISSUE IN A SMALL TOWN co-directors Beatrice Alda and Jennifer Brooke took the time to talk to We Are Movie Geeks about LEGS: A BIG ISSUE IN A SMALL TOWN

Interview conducted by Tom Stockman October 26th, 2016

Tom Stockman: Have you guys been to St. Louis before?

Beatrice Alda: No, we’re excited. We’ve never been there before.

TS: How did you get interested in this story about this leg statue?

BA: We actually live in the same town.

TS: Oh you guys live there in Sag Harbor. I didn’t realize that.

BA: Yes we do, it’s been a controversy in the town for quite a while.  We really didn’t look into it until a couple of years ago when it was tied up in the courts. Really though, if you live in the town you’re used to the story being in The New York Times. We don’t think that much of it from our perspective as a town resident and we wondered how it could be such big news beyond our little town. We really wanted to understand, besides this piece of art, what is causing this furor. It has to be more than the legs and that’s what the movie reveals, what’s beneath the surface of this controversy. We unfold several issues that we think are universal topics like homophobia and xenophobia.

Jennifer Brooke: This is a big issue because this is a historic whaling town that aspires to keep things as they once were and not advance a change. That’s big topic in our film and I’m sure every small town across the country is dealing with the same issues.

TS: Did you find a lot of people that were against the legs? You keep going back to this woman named Jennifer Houser. Is she the one who filed the complaint?

BA: Yes.

TS:  It seems like most of the people that you interview are fine with the legs or indifferent. Even the mayor just seems sort of bemused by the attention.

BA: The mayor is not for the legs at all but he wouldn’t discuss that on camera. And the town board are the ones that implied that the legs were a structure, because they were looking to stick it to the women in a way that would make them have to take it down. We once were at a screening of the film in Vermont and someone in the audience wanted to know if we had taken a vote in the town to see who was for it and who was against it. Doesn’t work like that. It’s not a town resident vote. It’s under the jurisdiction of the village board. That’s why it was defined as a structure. They would not let it be seen as freedom of speech or freedom of expression. It got mired in all of this red tape. It didn’t really matter who was for or against it.

JB: There was a stir, so when you do a documentary, you sort of chase the story. We lined up people that we thought would be for the legs and we lined up people that we thought would be against the legs. We focused mostly on mostly on people that we thought would be interesting people to interview. People that we thought would be against it were frequently for it, Like the woman with the trailer in her yard.

TS: The state Supreme Court ruled that it had to come down. What is the status of the legs now? Are they still standing?

BA: They are supposed to take it down, but they are not taking it down. They’re quite defiant.

TS: What was the story behind Ruth Vered getting arrested for serving alcohol at her art gallery?

BA: She has a well-known art gallery, and they have reception there every so often, and they would serve little glasses of wine. So, the town wanted to insist that she get a permit for that. But she is self-grandfathered in because she’s been doing it for so long and no one ever said anything. No one’s getting drunk by drinking a little wine while looking at artwork, but the police cracked down on her. She is a target because she is so outspoken. She’s very pro-Israel. If anyone comes to town who’s even mildly anti-Israel, she’ll stand on a street corner and protest. She’s outspoken and proud of it and she’s not going to quiet down. She has very conservative values.

TS: Was your film story-boarded, or was it more free-form? Did you follow the story and see where it took you?

BA: We always knew that we wanted to do a film about this small town that we live in and that we love very much. It’s chock-full of real characters. We had a lot of ideas for stories about the town. The legs story seemed like a great vehicle to get into the underbelly of this town. The film was not storyboarded, but we knew most of the characters that we wanted to explore. A few more popped up as we started pulling the story together.

JB: We also wanted to know more about the background of Larry Rivers, the artist who had sculpted the legs originally, for those who didn’t understand the significance of Larry Rivers in the world of art. There are some experts in the film that talk about him. Then as we started interviewing people and all of these themes about outsiders versus insiders, and whether you’re a foreigner, and how the town responds to you as being a foreigner, all of those things started becoming very clear.

TS: Was there anyone who you approached that did not want to speak on camera?

BA: It’s not so much that people didn’t want to talk on camera. Most of the people know us and know that we do very balanced films, But it’s what they were unwilling to say on camera. We didn’t want to push people beyond that. The mayor wouldn’t discuss on camera his exact feelings on a number of topics. You notice he talked around a lot of topics.

TS: Have the residence of Sag Harbor seen your film?

JB: Yes, we did a screening at the Hamptons Film Festival. It was a totally packed house full of a lot of people we know, and a lot of people we didn’t know. They really enjoyed it, but they got every single nuance.

TS: Was there anybody who was unhappy about how they were portrayed in the film?

BA: No. One of the people who explains her story in the film had a very difficult time. Her experience in Sag Harbor was so difficult that the topic is too painful for. She’s put a lot of effort towards moving on. We know her, and we’ve given her the opportunity to see the film, but she doesn’t want to go there and we respect that. She was traumatized by her experience of living here.

TS: Does she still live there?

BA: No.

TS: One thing that stuck out to me in the film was a scene where he gay fellow talks about the all-white local Boy Scout troop that he can’t join.

BA: No, He saying it’s like an all-white group he can’t join. He’s making an analogy.

TS: OK, I was confused. Is this because of a rule against gay leaders?

BA: Yes, at the time there were no gay families that were invited to be part of the scouts. You couldn’t be a scout if you came out as gay or a scout leader if you were gay, so they couldn’t have their children participate.

TS: But at the end of the film, it’s announced that the scout it changed their policy. This story reminds me of something that happened in St. Louis a decade or two ago. On the highway, there was a billboard for a florist that showed a big image of shapely disembodied women’s legs and the billboard said “come enjoy our stems”. Feminist groups here in St. Louis got angry and threw paint on the billboard. It was a big story at the time. Did anyone in Sag Harbor complain because the legs were sexualized?

JB:  It’s very hard to get underneath what gets people so upset because they’re not open about it. That’s why we bring in the doctor to comment on these things, someone who’s made a career as a sociologist. He explains that perhaps one of the reasons is that these legs are sexualized in people’s minds.

BA: There are some that think the legs are too promiscuous for this little town that they had signed on for. They had signed on for the charming little village.

TS: Perhaps the billboard in St. Louis offended feminists because they were using sexy legs to sell something while the sculpture there in Sag Harbor is just there for decor.

JB: The sculpture isn’t really disembodied legs it has an ending point. It operates in and of itself.  It’s not cut off legs from a woman’s body.

TS: Have you been showing your documentary at some film festivals and how has it been received so far?

BA: It’s probably been in over 20 film festival so far and we have been to many of them, all over.  We haven’t been to the Midwest yet. We’re going to Kansas after St. Louis.  It’s been received very well because it really does hit it a common chord with people. We’ve received some audience award.  What happens after the screenings is that there is a great discussion.

JB: As filmmakers, that makes us feel as if we have accomplished something. It really starts a discussion about how we live alongside each other in small towns when we don’t necessarily agree.

TS: What was your filmmaking backgrounds before you tackled this project?

BA: We did another documentary in 2011 called OUT LATE.  It’s about people who came out as LGBT as a senior citizens. We had a great festival run with that. You can see it on Amazon.

TS: What are your roll-out plans for LEGS: A BIG ISSUE IN A SMALL TOWN?

BA: We’re talking to some people about getting the widest distribution possible. Our screenings have been so well-attended, and people are asking where they can get a copy of the film.

TS: How did G.E. Smith get involved with your film? Does he live there in Sag Harbor? I remember him from Saturday Night Live.

JB:Yes, he’s one of the residents of Sag Harbor and he’s a musician who played with Dan Rizzie who scored our film. This was the first time he’d scored a film, which is exciting for him as an artist. He brought in G.E. Smith.

TS: What’s next for you guys? Do you know what your next documentary is going to be about?

BA: We’re researching right now for our next film but I don’t want to go into too many details because it’s a very specific concept. Hopefully we’ll be shooting in the winter.

TS: Good luck with your film and I hope you enjoy your time here in St. Louis.

BA: Thank you.

JB: We’re looking forward to being there.