Festivals        INTERVIEW: ANJA KOFMEL

Camera Lucida: How long did you do your research?
Kofmel: The process took 6 years and there is a lot of material.

Camera Lucida: So editing was very important?
Kofmel: Yes, and research was important in the sense that I couldn’t show something in the film if you don’t tell it from different sides. If you have a statement from many people and you find an interesting reference, then you start your research again and I have to figure out how I can prove it. I was aware that it was a sensitive topic and I wanted to make sure that if something is stated, it really happened like that. So, editing was the most challenging part. I needed to find a balance between live action, animation and archives. I also needed to have some sort of structure for the film before I could go on with the expensive animation sequences. The whole process of gaining control of the film was challenging until the end.

Camera Lucida: In this huge bulk of research, it’s not easy to decide which material to choose and what to leave aside. There is a short introductory passage on the history of Yugoslavia (how it was created and, then, how it was destroyed). Although it was very informative, some would say it was too simplistic and reductive as a lesson on one’s country history?
Kofmel: It’s a long process, a lot of drafts. You try, then you show to people to check if they get the story. And I realise that this historical story is very important, especially for people not coming from former Yugoslavia, not only because they have no clue about what happened there, but also to understand why international people with a strong religious and nationalistic background would come to participate in the war of the 1990’s. Why would they?

Camera Lucida: Did you get that answer?
Kofmel: Most of them had a really nationalistic background and some of them came to fight communism, which is bullshit, because it wasn’t even communism, it was something else, like socialism. Some people came to support ustashi, their “brothers’ as they say, in ideology. And some came because they were desperate and they had life problems, so there were different reasons. To me, this historical part was important to understand why suddenly you have these nationalists from all over the world going to Yugoslavia, to the heart of Europe, to fight this war that is not theirs.

But I had some situations…I am talking about this guy who is not in the film… and some of them were really young and they are in the flash of this war and they come to these situations when they do something that in normal situations they wouldn’t do. And then, they have to live with it. And for me it was confusing to realise when these monsters become humans somehow in these moments … and I didn’t know how to deal with it. When I started filming it was very easy - ‘bad guys killed Chris and Chris is a good guy’ - but then you realise that some, not all of them, had reasons why they did it and they regret it.

Camera Lucida: Alonso says in the film that “Flores was a psychiatric case, a nutcase who wanted to become Che”.
Kofmel: But I also heard that he was a charismatic, educated guy. I mean his father was in politics for long and he was helping Che, so he knew all these figures from the world politics. So when you know that, you can understand better why young soldiers were following him. He had different sides: he had charisma, ideals, they were not mine (smile), and he was smart as well. In spite of his ideals being on the wrong side, he did become a leader.

Camera Lucida: Joshua Oppenheimer, for example, deals in his films with the monstrosity of human beings, and he realistically displays villains, criminals, murderers as humans who enjoy their life to the fullest, dance and play music. I find it hard to like ‘human monsters’. How did you approach these dark, monstrous people, how did you talk to them, knowing that some of them may have killed Chris?
Kofmel: It’s funny you mention Oppenheimer. I just came back from my shoot in Croatia, arrived in Zurich and I thought ‘OK I can go to cinema and watch the Act of killing’. And I did. And yes, he shows all these monsters, but there is a moment in this film when one of the guys realises what he has done and he starts to vomit, it’s really such an ugly sound (she tries to imitate it). And to me it’s such a shocking scene, because there, all of a sudden, he turns human. It was shocking for me because I had exactly the same vomiting sound from one of the guys I interviewed. He’s not in the film because he didn’t want to be filmed. He was part of the team who killed Chris, I know that. And I think he is the only one who feels pity for what he did. I recorded him, but he didn’t allow me to use it. But this sound… I’ll never forget it, it’s not vomiting, but like… the evil coming out, a crazy sound. And it’s in these moments you realise they are human. Yes, they are monsters, but they are also human. Like in Oppenheimer’s films. Some of them realise what they did and they feel regret.

Camera Lucida: But they didn’t feel guilty really? That is a psycho-case for me…
Kofmel: But I had some situations…I am talking about this guy who is not in the film… and some of them were really young and they are in the flash of this war and they come to these situations when they do something that in normal situations they wouldn’t do. And then, they have to live with it. And for me it was confusing to realise when these monsters become humans somehow in these moments … and I didn’t know how to deal with it. When I started filming it was very easy - ‘bad guys killed Chris and Chris is a good guy’ - but then you realise that some, not all of them, had reasons why they did it and they regret it.

I am thinking to myself, trying to imagine these not-normal situations when people feel compelled to kill. What kind of situation is that? A situation on drugs? Altered state of mind? And then you go on a killing/raping/mutilation spree? How do you come to that situation? Oliver Stone’s film Natural born killers comes to mind. Do drugs make only some people crazier than others? Why do only some people on drugs get these murderous impulses, while others just dance to music, laugh and try to connect with others? Why this impulse to destroy another human being? Can we understand that? Should we, non-psychiatrists, understand that at all? Their atrocities should be unimaginable. I am wondering what would happen if poor and homeless people all started having murderous impulses and started killing for food and shelter, not for fun. They will be easier to catch and punish. But those large-scale political murderers are not brought to justice, not because there is lack of evidence, but because they are needed to sustain the regime of injustice. And the poor, uneducated masses are needed to the ruling elites.

Camera Lucida: Yes, but they still have their lives, they are not punished?
Kofmel: Are they not punished?

Camera Lucida: Not by law. And they should be in the name of the victims of the war and as a warning for potential future crimes.
Kofmel: I don’t want to defend them, and, of course, there are those who don’t regret what they did. But for those who do and feel suicidal, I think this is a bigger punishment for them than prison. If you have a real problem with yourself, then you cannot live with yourself, your life becomes a horrible punishment.

Camera Lucida: But then, what is the definition of a human being? It’s hard to get into the heads of these murderous monsters.
Kofmel: I know what you mean. But I see different types of people. Some of them don’t regret, some of them do and that’s when they become human beings.

It’s a long process, a lot of drafts. You try, then you show to people to check if they get the story. And I realise that this historical story is very important, especially for people not coming from former Yugoslavia, not only because they have no clue about what happened there, but also to understand why international people with a strong religious and nationalistic background would come to participate in the war of the 1990’s. Why would they?

Camera Lucida: Alex gives a very rational analysis…
Kofmel: He’s still proud of what he did,

Camera Lucida: So he will not kill himself?
Kofmel: I am not talking about these guys.

Camera Lucida: How did you get the agreement from these guys to appear in the film and speak publicly about their crimes? Was it the ego thing for them?

Natural born killers comes to mind again

Kofmel: I think that and, also, the family connection – when the family don’t know where the body is and what happened, the advantage was the fact that I was a cousin, a cousin who wanted to find out. It’s a mixture of many things. And this is the part I really appreciated.

Camera Lucida: And you manage to get the most out of them.
Kofmel: What they are saying is important… to understand that things are not black and white, really, that they were in positions to choose between bad and very bad.

Camera Lucida: The defining moment of the film for me was Chris’s quote: ”The people who suffer the most in the war are those who don’t want the war.” How did you deal with deciphering his notes?
Kofmel: I had several boxes and I returned to them many times. Then, I did my research elsewhere, went back to his notes, came across new names…

Camera Lucida: Did you find most names in his writings?
Kofmel: Yes, but I didn’t know who some of the names stand for. And I went back to his notes and, all of a sudden, it made sense. He made these notes for himself, not for me and I didn’t know what they meant. It was really hard work.

Camera Lucida: When did you come into contact with Siniša Juričić, your Croatian producer?
Kofmel: It was a coincidence. There was a woman who worked in my production and told me you need a contact to help you with your shooting in Croatia. And then when I met him I realised he knew most of my protagonists. He was driving Chris, it’s such a coincidence. And this production company considered him to be a co-producer. At first, I didn’t know if I could do this, then I decided yes, I can. And he helped me a lot. He helped me, for example, to find Heidi Rinke. So, I saw him as a tool to lead me and find this parallel between Chris and me. I wanted him to be a film character, but there can be a conflict of interest if he is a producer and a character. I thought a lot about it and decided yes. We made this very clear in the documentary part.

Camera Lucida: When I think about your animation, two films come to mind: Persepolis and Waltz with Bashir. You, also, chose to do the film from the child’s perspective as in Persepolis. Did you see these films?
Kofmel: Yes, Persepolis was a great film. But I saw it after I had already made my short film. It’s a coincidence that I also have a black & white film and a girl. But there was another animation film that inspired me, a short film. Waltz with Bashir pushed me even further to add the documentary part to my film. I liked both films, but I don’t understand the concept when you put a person on a chair and you draw it. I think it’s boring, I don’t get it. Waltz with Bashir exhibits fake animation, which shows faces that are empty faces. I am maybe too critical…Animation cannot show stories of emotions, which is why I decided to have more documentary parts.

Camera Lucida: How do you feel being a female filmmaker in the male industry?
Kofmel: I want to make films and I want to be successful because I am a good filmmaker and not because I am a woman or a man. I want to be judged by what I am doing and not by my sex. But it is an issue because the majority of my crew were men, older men, and you have to fight for certain things. If I get funding, I don’t want to get it because I am a woman.

Camera Lucida: But it shouldn’t be like that.
Kofmel: But sometimes it is. I don’t want to be treated as a woman or a man, but as a human being. But it is an issue.

Camera Lucida: Most of the men you deal with as your protagonists are macho men.
Kofmel: Yes, but sometimes it was worse within a team than shooting these horrible macho men. I was so angry. There are a lot of older men, above fifty, and ‘there comes this young woman who tells them what to do as a director’. And I knew very well what I wanted to do. I wasn’t even aware of that issue - that I am a young woman and that I would have problems. But when you are faced with problems, you realise you just have to kick back. I know what I am doing. You just have to cope with different situations.

Camera Lucida: So, this film was important for you as a growth process, a spiritual journey?
Kofmel: Yes, it was very important. I wasn’t aware of that question before.

Camera Lucida: One of the most controversial parts of your film is the reference to Opus Dei. You claim that they funded some brigades.
Kofmel: I have much more evidence than I could show. I know it’s true. I know Flores was part of Opus Dei and he was sent to Yugoslavia as an East European correspondent from ‘La Vanguardia’ - if you google him now, you find out that he is a person of Opus Dei Austria. There is an Opus Dei University in Navarra, which is official Opus Dei. They have it on their website explaining that it is an elitist Opus Dei University. What I told you are all facts that lead to the evidence that shows that they could have financed the brigades

The only moment Alex was irritated was when I asked him about Opus Dei. Throughout the interview he always played mind games with me, but this was the only moment he was genuinely irritated.

Camera Lucida: I suppose you have no plans to make part 2 to this film?
Kofmel: No, it’s not healthy…

Maja Bogojević