In addition to his work on the Twitterthon this week, Basil Tsiokos also broke down his experience at Hot Docs with a series of three posts replete with capsule reviews. You can find part one here, part two here and part three here.

Indiewire on May 9 published a recollection of Hot Docs programmer Charlotte Cook’s inaugural year in the festival’s driver seat. One of her first thoughts after scoring her gig? “Hot Docs had taken a chance on me, and now I had four months to try and not break the largest documentary festival in North America,” she said. I’m pretty sure she did a great job.

The Hollywood Reporter took a gander at the selections at this year’s Sheffield Doc/Fest, set to run from June 13-17. The folks over at DocGeeks also had a nice rundown of the films being offered across the pond this year, along with other events.

The folks at the International Documentary Association hooked us up with a flashback to the administration of Bush 41, posting a 1988 issue of Documentary Magazine in its entirety in advance of its Doc U event on the future of documentary film on PBS. The issue is certainly an interesting reminder of how cyclical some of the documentary filmmaker’s struggles seem to be.

Indiewire on May 11 published a short profile of Jason Spingarn-Koff, filmmaker and curator of the New York Times’ relatively new Op-Docs initiative. Spingarn-Koff said of the effort, We’re trying to create a forum for filmmakers to express themselves using their medium, just like our print Op-Ed contributors use their talents as writers.”

Variety on May 11 published its overview of the doc selections at this year’s Cannes, which number seven in total.

This week the D-Word online doc community is hosting a five-day discussion (registration required for access) with doc script doctor Fernanda Rossi on how filmmakers can improve their loglines and pitches to better their chances of receiving funding.

Uniondocs took notice of a documentary class being offered by Jem Cohen at the International Center of Photography this July. The class with the filmmaker, who made the seminal Fugazi concert film INSTRUMENT, runs $460. More information is here.

As always, Christopher Campbell of the Documentary Channel has this week’s theatrical releases, which include Joe Berlinger’s examination of the making of the Paul Simon record Graceland, which he made in South Africa during the apartheid era.

You can send tips and recommendations for the Monday Memo .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address), or tweet them to @GuerrillaFace. Have a great week everybody!

Writing for The Wrap, Steve Pond on Monday, April 30 had reported that films screening in The International Documentary Association (IDA) DocuWeeks program would again qualify for Oscar consideration, despite rules changes that had thrown that possibility into doubt. However, the qualification had resulted from the Los Angeles Times’ decision to review every film screened at DocuWeeks. Also, IDA on May 3 announced its dates for this year’s program. The series will screen from August 3-23, 2012 at the IFC Center in New York, and from August 10-30, 2012 at the Laemmle NoHo 7 in Los Angeles.

The International Documentary Film Festival Amsterdam (IDFA) in an April 27 Facebook post announced that the second selection round for its Jan Vrijman Fund had been cancelled this year due to government budget cuts. The fund was dedicated to helping filmmakers in developing countries. In response, IDFA Director Ally Derks made a public plea to the government to ask it to restore funding.

Canadian documentary filmmaker Kevin McMahon on May 5 presented an argument for making the documentary the official art form of Canada, in response to news that the government was cutting the budgets of filmmaking institutions the National Film Board of Canada (NFB), the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (CBC) and Telefilm.

In their “Filmmaker’s Toolkit” section, Indiewire on Tuesday, April 30 posted eight tips that filmmakers should consider when asking themselves if their project is ready for a crowdfunding effort. An interesting idea raised by the post is that as crowdfunding efforts grow in popularity, so too will donor fatigue, making successful crowdfunding campaigns even more work for filmmakers.

Another helpful titbit came via ITVS’s Beyond the Box blog, which gave us a post by ITVS Vice President Claire Aguilar on how to pitch your film at Tribeca.

Realscreen’s Adam Benzine this week noted the new trend of Hollywood remaking documentary films into “fictional” narratives, noting that UNDEFEATED, BROOKLYN CASTLE and INDIE GAME: THE MOVIE had all been tapped for such a purpose.

Paste Magazine on Monday, April 29 released the latest incarnation of its annual list of 20 Great Documentaries to Watch on Netflix. The list has a nice mix of social issue docs and formally interesting films, and is topped by Davis Guggenheim’s WAITING FOR “SUPERMAN.”

At the Huffington Post, Jonathan Kim spoke with director Ondi Timoner about her new projects, the online interview show with documentary filmmakers, BYOD (Bring Your Own Doc) and a YouTube channel dedicated to investigating the tech startup world.

Stuart Nussbaumer of Filmmaker Magazine took a look at four Tribeca docs that may not have gotten a lot of attention during the actual festiva: THE ZEN OF BENNET; EVOCATEUR: THE MORTON DOWNEY JR. MOVIE; MANSOME; and SEXY BABY.

Doc journo Tom Roston on Saturday, May 5 hosted a discussion of branded documentaries at documentary arts space UnionDocs. But before that, he posted a few of his ideas on the subject at the POV blog. With funding an ever-present challenge for filmmakers, Roston says it’s increasingly likely that the line between branded content and documentary will continue to blur.

In a slight counter to the prospect of a doc world dominated by marketing, the Documentary Television blog on April 30 posted a great round-up of documentary funding institutions available to those in North America. And Indiewire on May 4 rounded up some advice from established filmmakers for first-timers taken from a Hot Docs panel.

In the cable TV world, Indiewire May 2 reported that the Oprah Winfrey Network (OWN) would not renew its agreement with documentary content producer ro*co Films Productions, but that it would continue to solicit submissions from independent content producers to be aired on the channel.

The IFP has put out its call for entries for documentary works-in-progress. The deadline is May 25, and you can find more information here.

Younger filmmakers in New York City may be interested in attending an artist town hall meeting on how to make it as a younger artiston Wednesday, May 16 at 6 p.m. in the Bronx. The meeting is being hosted by the Bronx Council on the Arts, in partnership with the Cultural Strategies Initiative.

Filmmaker Errol Morris this week also published a series of three long posts on the New York Times’ Opinionator blog on the theme of “What’s in a Name?” Morris kicked off the inaugural post with a quote from surrealist painter Rene Magritte (ceci n’est past une blog).

Christopher Campbell of the Documentary Channel blog has this week’s theatrical releases. Among them are Jessica Yu’s LAST CALL AT THE OASIS about the world’s dwindling water supplies, which is reviewed by the New York Times here. Also reviewed by the Times this week was ballet doc FIRST POSITION, by director Bess Kargman.

As always, please send any tips or recommendations you have for the Memo .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Have a great week everybody!

Similar cuts happening north of the border, in Canada, also have traditional filmmaking institutions, such as the National Film Board of Canada (NFB) taking a harder look at new media and new distribution models, according to the Globe and Mail.

POV was active on the web this week with a couple of helpful posts and events. On Wednesday, April 25 the show hosted a Twitter “docchat” with series producer Yance Ford on how to get your film on public television. The series followed that up with a great post sharing six golden rules for filmmakers using social media, penned by Sean Holmquest.

The New York Times, too, was particularly active on the doc front this week. On April 27, the Grey Lady published a piece by Mike Rubin that took a look at the documentation of Detroit that seems to have seized the collective consciousness. The paper the same day published a piece by Tom Roston on documentary filmmaking duos, among them Ashley Sabin and David Redmon.

Times film writer Manohla Dargis also that day published a story about director Shirley Clarke, a radical filmmaker whose works, which include both narrative and documentary films, are to be rereleased by Milestone Films over the next few years. And finally, Paul Simon wrote about the risks and potential rewards of film investment, citing producer Marc Simon, who most recently worked on the film UNRAVELED.

The folks running the IDA’s blog were kind enough to share recaps of two recent Doc U events, one that investigated whether doc films were art, and another examining the mechanics of trailers. It’s almost as good as being in LA.

This week in the Great White North, Canada’s POV Magazine released its latest issue with Lisanne Pajot and James Swirsky, the filmmakers behind INDIE GAME: THE MOVIE, given the coveted cover story slot.

Indiewire recapped the preview (of sorts) that filmmaker Laura Poitras gave to an audience at the Whitney of her third installment in a trilogy of films examining the cost of terrorism and the U.S.’s response to it. Most of the evening consisted of a dialogue between hacker/activist Jacob Appelbaum and NSA whistleblower William Binney. The pair provided a chilling account of the potential power the NSA has to monitor the communications and activities of U.S. citizens in their own country.

The DocumentaryTech blog took a look at the much-derided Final Cut Pro X a full year after its initial release. If anything, the post makes clear that the debate over the changes to Final Cut are ongoing, and show no signs of abating in the near future.

This week, Amos Vogel, the founder of the Cinema 16 film society passed away at the age of 91. Vogel was a key early proponent of experimental films, and eventually became a distributor of them, as well as a founder of the New York Film Festival. Christopher Campbell of the Documentary Channel Blog also posted an encomium for Vogel.

Andrew Parker of Dorkshelf on Monday, April 23 published an interview with one-half of the Ross Brothers filmmaking duo, Turner Ross, about their latest project, TCHOPITOULAS.

The Chicago Reader also put in some face time with doc filmmaker Robert Greene, speaking with him on his wrestling film FAKE IT SO REAL.

HBO stirred up the political pot a bit this week with news that in June it would air a documentary on former President George H.W. Bush titled 41. Evidently the first Bush president has never written a memoir, and will be opening up the first time on subjects such as his time with the CIA.

Christopher Campbell of the Documentary Channel blog is reliable as ever with his list of this week’s theatrical releases.

As always, please send any tips or recommendations you have for the Memo .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Thanks, and have a great week!

Audience: I thought you really struck gold with Prachi. How obvious was it to you when you first met her that you wanted to profile her? And how hard was it to get her to watch the pageant?

Nisha Pahuja: When you meet somebody like Prachi it’s like getting a brick thrown at your head. It’s sort of a no-brainer. You go, I can’t believe somebody like you really exists. It was fairly straightforward to decide that she was going to be one of the characters that I would follow. In terms of getting her to watch the pageant, she was incredible, as was her family. They were extremely generous, and let me do pretty much whatever I wanted. They had no issue with it. I know that her father felt really uncomfortable, and there were times when he would put his head down. Prachi’s mom was transfixed. There was a sort of running commentary thoughout—I love her hair, I love that frock. And I think Prachi was sort of embarrassed by her mom. I think Prachi was more uncomfortable.

Audience: I love the fact that no character is admirable or reprehensible in the extreme, it’s not one versus another. I have a basic question: Everybody seems to be using a mix of languages. Is that what’s done? Or did you have an influence on that because you speak English?

Pahuja: No, in India, often people will do that. It’s called Hinglish, people often switch back and forth, it’s quite common.

Audience: How did you gain access to the camp, since you were the first person to do that?

Pahuja: I knew that if I was going to get access to the camp, if I was going to make any actual inroads I was going to have to get people to trust me. Which meant I had to spend lots of time in India. So that’s what I did. I basically divided my time between India and Canada. It took two years to get access to the camp, but I just spent a lot of time talking with and meeting people. And people at various points in the food chain, so people who were really high up and then foot soldiers.

Audience: Have the characters seen the film?

Pahuja: None of them have, but I’m actually going to India in about three weeks, so I’ll definitely show it to Prachi and her family. I’m sort of anxious and excited about that. And we’ll show it also to Ruhi and her family.

Audience:  How many girls are in the fundamentalist camps?

Pahuja: There’s a couple hundred of them that take place each year across the country, and there’s usually anywhere between 100 to 300 girls at each camp. Sometimes they’re smaller, but they’re usually about 100 girls. Bombay tends to have the largest ones. The place I shot had a smaller camp.

Audience: How many years have these camps been going on?

Pahuja: I’m not really sure about the camps, but the movement began in 1992. It was actually a response to the Ayodha dispute [in which a mosque was destroyed by hardline Hindus].

Audience: There were a lot of similarities between what was going on in the camps, and in the pageants. The latter is a form of oppression that’s more familiar to the people in this country, and probably seems normal. It’s put forth as progress for women in India. My question is, what happens to the young women who didn’t win?

Pahuja: Ruhi actually participated again in the 2012 pageant, and again she lost. Often this pageant is a launching pad for Bollywood. So one of the winners is now sort of getting into Bollywood. She’s meeting with agents and has been very picky about who she signs with. For other girls who lose, there’s an incredible amount of visibility. It’s a country of about 1.2 billion people, so if you’re selected to be one of the 10 contestants, the visibility is extraordinary. A lot of the girls who lost have gone on to modeling.

Audience: All of the men we see seem to be off-center or off-base. Why is that?

Pahuja: Well, not all men in India are like that. Ruhi’s dad is actually quite wonderful. But India is a patriarchal society. It’s slowly changing, but change happens very slowly. I think men throughout history have tried to control women.

Audience: You obviously chose really extreme examples. Did you do that deliberately, and not show the booming middle class that might be more moderate? I was wondering is Ruhi a college dropout? And what about Prachi?

Pahuja: All of the pageant contestants had gone through college. In earlier years they hadn’t been. A lot had come from very poor families or farms. There is a burgeoning middle class and there are women who are getting educated in India. But for me, I wanted to show two ideas of India being put forth, and how women are being used to put forth these two competing ideas. That’s why I chose the two groups. I think sometimes people might be missing context. Originally we had a feminist and her daughter. And I was hoping they would be that middle voice, and put the two other stories into some kind of a larger context, but they were so extreme. They were yet another extreme. And they were so full of anger and rage. It felt like the film sort of lost its balance, so I stuck to these two.

Audience: You said that these ideas are using women, but I think the women are using these ideas as well. Prachi’s very conscious of the irony of her ambition, and how it’s against this philosophy. Did you get that feeling from the other leaders of the Hindutva movement? Did you sense that irony amongst the leaders whom you feature?

Pahuja: No, I didn’t. I think Prachi was more aware than some of the other girls in the camp. But there was certainly a kind of feminist angle to the camp. There was a sense of empowering these young girls on the one hand. And on the other hand, making sure they were going to be homemakers. They were getting these mixed messages.

Audience: I was wondering what made you decide to make this film?

Pahuja: I love India, I go there all of the time. I’m sort of half-based there. And I was looking for another project, and I came up with looking at this Miss India pageant, and using it as a way to look at India as a country in transition. And the more I started to reading about the pageant, and pageants in general in India, the more I started to come across the ideas of the fundamentalists, and also the feminists who were opposed to them. The film kind of developed from there. Being an Indian woman, obviously you can relate to the struggles of the girls onscreen. The deeper I got into it, the more personal it became. But it didn’t start off that way.

Audience: Have you been able to screen this film in India?

Pahuja: Not as yet, no. There are plans to do a test screening in India, but Tribeca is the first, actually.

Audience: Did you get a sense of the level of education of the girls in the fundamentalist camps?

Pahuja: At least half or more than half were from villages, and didn’t get an education. But Prachi’s educated.