Larry Engel, Associate Professor of The Center for Environmental Filmmaking at American University, teaching on location in Alaska as part of the "Classroom in the Wild Program". Photo by Larry Engel
Wildlife filmmaker Randy Wimberg was with his dive team at Bikini Atoll in the South Pacific, filming shipwrecks and the wildlife around them. They were focused on a particular area of the atoll known as Shark Pass that has a large congregation of aggressive reef sharks, so they built a shark cage to protect the cameraman. A panel of the cage was removed so that the camera would have an unobstructed view. It measured 20 inches vertically and extended around the circumference of the cage.The plan was for Wimberg to be in the cage while someone in the nearby boat threw chum (an oily mix of fish bait and blood) into the water to attract sharks.
Wimberg climbed into the cage and was eased out on a line about 15 feet from the boat. When the deck hand started throwing in chum and bait, the sharks began showing up in large numbers. There were at least 30 reef sharks competing for food that was either stuck to the cage or drifting through it. Suddenly a shark shot right through the gap and exited through the other side of the cage, grazing Wimberg as it passed. Then the inevitable happened. A shark shot through the gap but didn’t pass smoothly out the other side. Instead it dove for the bottom of the cage. Scared, it frantically tried to get out of the confined space. Wimberg’s first reaction was to curl up in the bottom of the cage to escape the thrashing of the frightened animal. But the shark was diving down as well, trying to get out.
At the bottom of the small cage, Wimberg desperately tried to use his camera to push the animal up towards the exit but that didn’t work. He decided he had to get out himself. About the same time, his teammates in the boat above saw what was happening and quickly raised the shark cage to the surface. Wimberg managed to get out of the cage and into the boat without getting bitten by the shark. The shark was released unhurt. Wimberg’s near shark attack became a dramatic high point in the film.
Why do filmmakers like Randy Wimberg put their lives in danger to produce wildlife films with an environmental message? In Wimberg’s case, he is deeply committed to marine conservation and to stopping the wanton and wasteful destruction of sharks. By learning more about their habits and behavior, and educating the public about their value, filmmakers and conservationists are developing ways to stop shark numbers from plummeting. Shark depletion is only one problem the world is facing. As everybody knows,we have immense environmental challenges. We are fouling our own nest to an unprecedented degree. Powerful images and films (as we saw with An Inconvenient Truth) can help.
I founded American University’s Center for Environmental Filmmaking – which I run with the help of my School of Communication colleagues Larry Engel, Sandy Cannon-Brown and Maggie Burnette Stogner – to train filmmakers to produce films and new media that encourage conservation. Our students produce films for Maryland Public Television and other nonprofits and government agencies. We also bring outstanding filmmakers to campus to talk about their work. Our most recent guests have included Boyd Matson and Brady Barr from National Geographic, Dan Mathews from PETA,McArthur from Free Range Studios, David Mizejewski from Animal Planet, and Dan Basta from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. We provide innovative programs like Classroom in the Wild, an intensive outdoor workshop held in wilderness areas in which students camp out and learn how to meet the challenges – sometimes extreme challenges – of wildlife filmmaking in the field.
We recently launched the Student Short Film Festival with Phillippe Cousteau from Earth Echo International. This event is held every March as part of the Environmental Film Festival. We showcase the talents of emerging “green communicators” to promote environmental causes and empower individuals to make a difference. Another joint project we’ve embarked upon, this time with AU’s Center for Social Media, is the development of “best practices” for green filmmaking, with the goal of making the School of Communication’s film program the first in the nation to go green. We are going to define standards for “green” production for students in university film programs and professional documentary producers. For more on green filmmaking, read the sidebar written by filmmaker Larry Engel on how to help the planet when making films.
British filmmaker Andrew Buchanan made a film for the National Geographic Society called Earth Report 2006 without, in effect, any carbon emissions. Al Gore did the same with An Inconvenient Truth. Of course there were emissions during the production of both films, even after following the “reduce, reuse, recycle” rule. But those emissions were tracked and the film production budget paid the money needed to buy the film’s “carbon offsets.” The money was used to build wind turbines on a Native American reservation.
The students at the Center for Environmental Filmmaking in the School of Communication at American University are the future Randy Wimbergs. The next generation will similarly devote themselves to shooting amazing footage and compelling stories, all with the goal of promoting greater conservation awareness and action.
Chris Palmer directs AU’s Center for Environmental Filmmaking, is president of the MacGillivray Films Educational Foundation and author of the book “Shooting in the Wild: An Insider’s Account of Making Movies in the Animal Kingdom.”
