Filmmaker Chris Smith started out the way many young would-be directors forage for themselves: A self-financed feature film on a shoestring budget and a prayer. But shortly after the release of this film, his $14,000 debut, American Job (1996) -- about a depressed kid in the Midwest working a succession of meaningless and soul-dampening working gigs , earned him considerable praise. His next film, the documentary American Movie (1999), about the lengths one amateur horror film maker, Mark Borchardt, went to make his own film, earned him more praise and a much larger audience. In the last decade, Smith has established himself as both a skilled documentarian of off-beat characters (Home Movie, The Yes Men), and also a talented narrative director of his own work (The Pool). His most recent film, Collapse, finds him back in documentary mode, filming the political journalist Michael Ruppert as he espouses his theories on "peak oil," the crumbling international financial system and the ultimate self-destruction of the human race. The DVD was released on June 15.

So, I have to confess, I actually saw Collapse very recently, and I’m still pretty shattered by it, so it’s hard for me to gather my thoughts.
Yeah, because you’re thinking more about your life instead of the film?

It kind of pulls the curtain back for you, and once you see it it’s hard to not see it.
We had a very similar reaction. I think that the balance in making the film that we were trying to achieve was just to lay out the information and then show there are some aspects of Michael [Ruppert]’s life, that you start to call into question some of his thoughts and philosophies. I think that to be honest we had a very similar reaction when we met him and found him to be a completely fascinating person but just weren’t quite sure how to take and digest all the information that he was talking about. The one thing I can tell you from spending time with him is he is a very genuine, honest, caring person and believes 100% that this is happening, and that from his analysis and from the way he’s assimilated the information that this is very, very real. But what I was trying to show in the film is that it's possible to create some sort of self-fulfilling prophecy by pulling information that supports your thesis and conclusion. That’s what I thought to be the most interesting aspect of the film, that’s what myself, my producer and my editor found so interesting in making the film is that even to this day, we’re not entirely sure of our thoughts regarding the material, but what we came away from it with is that it fostered hours and hours of debate and discussion about issues that are potentially very important and crucial, that are very important and critical for mankind.

Is it too much of a reach to suggest that there’s a certain kind of similarity, at least in type of person, between Michael and Mark Borchardt (from American Movie)?
I guess I’ve always been somewhat attracted to outsiders and people that live outside the main stream and sort of look at the world from their own perspective, and live that way. And Michael definitely fits in that same mode and Mark fits in that mode, although they worked in two totally different disciplines and have very different lives. They are both so committed to what they believe in.

There’s a similarity as to their conviction -- but also the sacrifice that this conviction has cost them. By the end of both of those films, even if you find the people themselves, at different points amusing or conflicted, you can’t help but be sympathetic to them because they’ve sacrificed so much to be where they are.
I felt the exact same way about both of them: Here’s someone who you may write off at first glance just in terms of them being prone to stereotype. I think with both films, my hope was to move the audience beyond the stereotype and understand them from the human level and show through the compassion that you can have for other people who have dedicated their lives to these causes and regardless of your belief in them, you can sympathize. With both films I’d hope that the audience would have an impression of the beginning of the film that’s changed by the end.

I watched the postscript piece on the DVD where he certainly seems in a better place. In fact, by the end of both American Movie and Collapse that your protagonists, because you’re in the act of making this film, you’ve left them in a better situation financially and otherwise.
I think that there’s some sort of vindication for both of them. They feel that the films have in some way added some level of credibility to the fight that they have taken on -- you know if it’s a fight to become a filmmaker or spread this message that Michael has -- I think that in both cases that the film has left some justification for all of the work that they’ve done. And I feel very happy about that, because I think that they both deserve it, regardless of your opinion of the work that they do, it’s hard to deny the sacrifice and the level of commitment they’ve both made towards what they’re trying to do.

How did you go about the process of choosing the B-roll stuff, the supporting media that you slip in from time to time.
I collaborated very strongly with my editor (who I think is…brilliant) and we talked a lot about it. Our goal with the archival footage was not to find things that were literal examples of what he was talking about, but trying to find things that, in an esoteric way, connected to what he was talking about to allow you to get more inside Michael’s mind, where it didn’t feel like a news story but it felt more film-like. Where it was strange, or creepy, or unsettling imagery, how it was all within what we considered to be normal. A lot of [the images] come from the era from when a lot of these decisions were being made about energy and the way America grew from the '50s, '60s and '70s, under this time of opulence and abundance of energy. So I think for us it was trying to use that imagery subconsciously to take you back to that idyllic place, and seeing in Michael’s world, where we’ve gotten to now, this very hard, stark reality. Seeing this man chain- smoking in an interrogation-like setup in the basement of this abandoned meatpacking plant in downtown Los Angeles. It was that juxtaposition that we found interesting.

Also, without going too far into the camp/satire range that would conceivably undermine what he was saying.
We definitely tried to steer away from campy aspects of those films because I did feel like that undermined a lot of what Michael was saying. Again, that’s like finding this balance where you weren’t trying to justify him, or be the vehicle establishing credibility for him but at the same time we didn’t want to undermine him. So it was really a delicate balance in trying to present him for who he is and allow him to have his moment to make his argument and let the audience go on a journey with understanding and learning about this guy and his life and how he’s ended up at this point. That, in a way, didn’t feel like it was passing judgment.

How many days was the shoot -- the interview -- itself?
Five days in total. For us it was a lot. There was so much material that it was necessary for us to have that time just to digest, understand, and then come back with additional questions.

The initial shoot was in the beginning of 2009, is that right?
Yes, it was March 2009.

And then the follow-up in the DVD is roughly when?
A year later, March 2010.

He seems to have become much more upbeat and jolly in that span of time.
Yeah, he is. I think that he’s gained a voice and that there are people he’s helping and listening to him, and I think the reaction to the film he felt very excited about the fact that the movie got out and the message got out. I think his personal life has changed in a lot of ways and he’s made connections through the film that have been very rewarding for him. I think that on a number of levels, I think his life has turned around. He seems happier than I’ve ever seen him in the time that we’ve known him.

And it seems like he’s actually been out in the sunshine a little.
Yeah, he has, he has a dog and he goes to the dog park. He’s actually come back to the cause and he has a very active Facebook page and he’s recently since the last interview that was done started this thing called Collapse Net (collapsenet.com) which is this community of people that are getting together that he’s trying to help. So I think he feels very connected to the world again. I think in large part that has something to do with his outlook.

I’m glad I watched that postscript because there was just such a haunting end point of the original film.
He was really at a bad place. It’s interesting trying to maintain that distance as a filmmaker. We felt for him. Ultimately, it’s the same with Mark [Borchardt]. These people’s lives were going on before we met them and will go on after. We try to maintain a journalistic distance. On a human and a friendship level we’re there for them, but in terms of the reality of what’s actually happening, it’s something that people have to live on their own terms. So he was at that place at the end of the movie, but we were very happy to see that his life’s turning around for him, even though he’s more convinced than ever that things are bad and getting worse, as time goes on.


Read our review of Collapse