For six months, one festival after another rejected Frank Popper’s first feature-length documentary, Can Mr. Smith Get to Washington Anymore? “They’d send out these form letters,” says Popper. “‘We got far more submissions than we have ever gotten before’—that’s code for, ‘We didn’t have time to look at your movie.’”
The streak broke when Popper, a high-school English teacher turned filmmaker, showed the film to Shelley Gabert, a former St. Louisan now living in Los Angeles. She showed it to a friend who helped pick films for Silverdocs, a festival created by the American Film Institute and the Discovery Channel. Not only was Mr. Smith invited to Washington, D.C., for the annual festival, it also wound up winning the prestigious Silverdocs Audience Award.
A Washington Post reviewer praised the film, calling it “deeply absorbing ... a lively, amusing and intimate peek into the inner workings of a campaign fight.”
In November, the International Documentary Association told Popper and his co-writers/co-producers, Matt Coen and Mike Kime, that Mr. Smith was a finalist for the IDA Feature Film award. The winner will be announced this month.
Soon the film had been shown in enough cities to qualify for consideration for an Academy Award; at press time, Popper was waiting on tenterhooks.
“Things like this don’t happen to half-Jewish guys like me from Webster Groves!” he says, still bemused.
Mr. Smith follows the gut-wrenching angst of the congressional campaign of Jeff Smith, a part-time political-science instructor at Washington University, who waged a David-and-Goliath race against Missouri’s political powerhouse, the Carnahan family, specifically Russ. Popper went behind the scenes of Smith’s campaign and filmed every agonizing, tense clash with the political dynasty.
Popper had his own David-and-Goliath moment after the film was made. He and his co-producers sent copies of the film to HBO and to Independent Lens, a highly regarded documentary venue on PBS. They heard nothing from HBO, but Independent Lens expressed interest. They started talking—nothing definite yet. Then an HBO executive, handed a copy of Mr. Smith as she was running to catch her plane, watched it in midair and loved it. HBO made an offer for Cinemax—and Popper and his co-producers declined. They went ahead and inked a contract with Independent Lens. “We just didn’t think it was the right thing to do,” says Popper—who never even mentioned the HBO offer to Independent Lens.
Why did you make the film? I was fed up with the Bush administration. While he was in office for the first three years I had steam coming out my ears. We had these weekly conversations at the dinner table, and my dad would say, “Settle down. Take your anger and make a movie; focus on something positive.”
Why Jeff Smith? A 30-second chance encounter. Jeff was at a book-signing event, working the crowd, and I walked up to him and said, “I’ve heard good things about you.” He said, “Yeah, you and 35 other people.” There was something about him—charisma. I was determined to make a documentary about this guy. He was funny, he was articulate, he was very forthright. Most of our congressmen are like Velveeta cheese.
Did the Smith campaign jump at the opportunity? No. I approached his campaign manager and said, “I want to make a behind-the-scenes documentary. Would you be interested?” I told him I wanted to follow them through the election process and the election. He agreed. On the first day, I showed up to shoot at a campaign-staff meeting. Smith looked at me and said, “I want this guy out of here.”
What changed his mind? His manager convinced him that it’d be good, that maybe they could use some footage for commercials. From that first meeting, I knew I was privy to interesting information—especially after he got a call from a politician in D.C.
How did you make sure people forgot the camera? By the end of the second day, Jeff said he’d completely forgotten that I was there. I was the entire crew, camera and sound, and I kept a very low profile. Typically I’d start from a distance and slowly move in closer. I never said a thing unless I was spoken to. I moved quietly.
Does Smith like the film? There are some things, definitely, he does not like, but overall, he thinks it’s a fair film. It’s an unvarnished look at a campaign with a lot of grungy stuff going on. A few remarks are personal. Campaign staffer Artie Harris talks about Jeff “looking like he’s 12 and sounding like he’s castrated.” A constituent asks him on the campaign trail, “Can’t you do something about that lisp of yours?” But Jeff is confident. I’m sure parts of the film irritate him, but that’s the price you pay for being a rock star.
What did you realize as you made the film? I set out to make a war-room movie, but it turned out to be more than that. The film shows problems in the system itself. The political establishment protects its own; it doesn’t encourage fresh voices. All the factors lean toward dynasties, toward brand names—Carnahan, Kennedy, Blunt. There’s no serious debate, and—this is the pathetic point—once you are in Congress, you’re there for as long as you want. Over a 50-year period we’ve had two congressmen in the 3rd District.
So do we just give up now? No. The way we elect our politicians is broken, but it’s fixable. I want audiences to walk out feeling hopeful. As bad as things are, they can be turned around by strong leadership and young, dynamic, passionate supporters.
How did making Mr. Smith compare to your other films? The process was like capturing lightning in a bottle. It’s the most compelling subject I’ve ever covered, and the stakes were the highest. From Jeff’s campaign manager to his communication director, every word that came out of their mouths was absolutely perfect. There’s no narrative; it’s fly-on-the-wall, unfolding in real time.
What was the audience’s response? Three-quarters of the way through the film, after watching the intensity of the campaign build to a head, I heard a woman in New York whisper to her friend, “My God, I’m exhausted!”
This film is really story-driven. It feels more like a movie than a documentary. Over and over I hear the phrase “edge of your seat”—and it certainly felt that way when I was behind the camera.
I also spoke to a woman who said she couldn’t sleep the night she watched it because she was so angry—angry at the voters, angry at the newspapers, angry at the political establishment, angry at herself for casting an uninformed vote in the very election depicted in the film.
Reactions that stayed with you? An Italian filmmaker in D.C. said, “This film shows America isn’t made up completely of crazies.” A man from the United Arab Emirates said that he thought every Arab should see it because of all the talk in the Middle East about democracy. He said that it would be very reassuring to Arabs to know that Americans are still struggling with democracy after 200 years.
