Lessons to Learn from Wakaliwood

2009. Isaac Nabwana Godfrey Geoffrey (or Nabwana I.G.G.) was just a fan of Hollywood action movies. He was living in the slum of Wakaliga, near Uganda’s capital city Kampala. He decided to make his own- Uganda’s first action movie! He sold everything he owned and made bricks so he could raise enough money to buy an old Sony camcorder.

Don’t Scale Back Your Ambition

Isaac rallied the people of Wakaliga together, with less than a $200 budget, to make Who Killed Captain Alex? an action movie that makes no sense whatsoever but is absolutely hilarious with surprisingly good action. One of the reasons is that he and his friends taught themselves Kung Fu and now compete in local championships, so the action is authentic. He built himself an editing suite to include CGI in his films, and after making every movie, he has to delete the footage so he has enough space to make his next film.

After the film became a success, he developed “Wakaliwood”, a film studio within Wakaliga that has created such hits as Bad Black, Cannibal Mama, and Ebola Hunter. They play film festivals worldwide, and enough fans bankroll Wakaliwood that it is self-sustaining. Isaac dreamed big, made a movie whose ambition doesn’t necessarily match its budget, and it paid off. His long-term project is building an entire life-size replica helicopter for his next film! and he’s almost there!

Don’t Forget Where You Came From

Isaac had survived the Ugandan Civil War and lived under the brutal dictatorship of Idi Amin. Yet he fed his experiences into his movie, which makes for one of the funniest moments in the movie. His production company, RaMon Film Productions, is named after his grandmothers Rachel and Monica, who raised him. He even composed a song dedicated to them which plays over the credits of Who Killed Captain Alex?

Throughout it all, Isaac has remained committed to improving his community through the growth of Wakaliwood. People in Wakaliga who sell his DVD’s are allowed to keep a large percentage of any sales. He cares about his friends and his family, whilst doing what he loves without sacrificing his integrity.  Not always true in Hollywood.

Expect the Unexpectable

Isaac made Who Killed Captain Alex? for fun. He never intended for anyone outside Wakaliga to see it. But when a copy of the trailer was uploaded to YouTube in 2010, it became a viral sensation across the globe. One of the reasons it was a success is because Isaac hadn’t intended to make money from the film initially, or have it be his “calling card”. He did what he loved for the fun of it, and that passion shines through.

Isaac was recently invited to China, home of his beloved Kung Fu movies. People all over the world love his films and journalists from the likes of Vice, BBC and Al Jazeera are constantly writing about Wakaliwood. Isaac managed to capitalize on his 15 minutes of fame and made it something sustainable. Who Killed Captain Alex? could have been written off as a joke, but 8 years later he has created a film industry in his hometown.

The Moral of the Story

Don’t scale back your ambition. Don’t forget where you came from. And to quote the film, “expect the unexpectable”.

Isaac should be an inspiration to filmmaker and writers alike. You have no excuse not to write your script or make your movie- if Isaac can make an action movie for $200 in a Ugandan slum, and keep it personal to him, then what’s stopping you?

Competing values are neutral.  They are a simple (often one word) expression of a fundamental truth or an ideal a person holds dear.  No value is inherently better or worse than another.  For example:  Freedom and Security are two fundamental American values.

America sees itself as “the home of the brave and the land of the free.”  Lady Liberty is an iconic symbol of the nation.  But to survive, every nation (or person) must be secure in its person, property and borders.  Security is also a fundamental American value, especially in these potentially very dangerous times.

The question is:  What happens when a character (or country) is forced to make starker and starker choices in favor of one value over (or to the exclusion of) another?

How much freedom are you willing to sacrifice or surrender in order to be secure?  As citizens are pushed to give up more personal autonomy, liberty or privacy, when do they cease to be free? Alternatively, how much security are you willing to sacrifice or surrender in order to be free?  If safety measures are too often thwarted by civil libertarians can a nation be adequately secure?

As the risk rises and a nation (or person) is pushed to the brink, it is forced to chose one value over the other.  These choices build up over time.  A final definitive choice should negate or eliminate one value in favor of another.   The payoff to a feature film well and satisfyingly written is to show this kind of final climactic choice at the end of the story.

For example:  In Schindler’s List, Oskar Schindler discovers war is the road to riches.  His Jewish accountant pads the factory payroll to save people from the camps.  At first, Schindler resists then, as he gets to know the factory workers, he gives away his watch, then his ring and then his cigarette case in making deals to shield them.  Schindler makes his final value choice when he gives his last trunk of money to protect those workers who are now finally and fully “his” responsibility. Schindler finishes the film penniless and dressed in the rags.  In a Power of Conscience film, like Schindler’s List, the values at stake are Personal Well-Being vs. Moral Responsibility.

In series television, this choice is paid off more slowly and over multiple episodes or seasons.  A television series shows how this choice is made through incremental action, over time, leading to a climactic series finale.

For example:  In NYPD Blues, Andy Sipowicz choses to face his demons one by one.  He battles his temper and his rage. First he reigns himself in and gets sober, then he gets married, has a baby, reconciles with his eldest son, loses that son, loses his wife and cares for his remaining child. Over 17 years the drunken, racist, misanthrope we met in the pilot becomes, in a final leap of faith, a temperate respected leader of the men in his precinct. In a Power of Will series, like NYPD Blues, each choice involves the competing values of Impluse vs Restraint.

Getting back to our earlier example: How is freedom finally sacrificed? What is the tipping point?  Alternatively, what well-meaning policies deal security a fatal blow?   The audience wants to see how this final value choice is driven by faith or by fear.   They want to see how the character is pushed to extremes that provoke action that conclusively defines his or her character.

Values + Action = Character

The obstacles in a film or television series should create the kind of risk, peril or danger that pushes the character to take actions that define what is most fundamentally important or true in a character’s life. This is the case even in comedy.  There is no greater risk or peril than the vulnerability that makes a character funny.

The character should be forced to make a stark, definitive and active choice. As one value is ultimately chosen, the character finally negates or surrenders the other contrasting value.  What price is paid for the character’s choice?  What are the consequences for the character?  The more expensive the price, the more dire the consequences are for your character, the more compelling and urgent your story will be for your audience.

I am still hard at work on my books about the Nine Character Types.  Stay tuned! And email me to get on a Special Offer List.

Competing values are neutral.  They are a simple (often one word) expression of a fundamental truth or an ideal a person holds dear.  No value is inherently better or worse than another.  For example:  Freedom and Security are two fundamental American values.

America sees itself as “the home of the brave and the land of the free.”  Lady Liberty is an iconic symbol of the nation.  But to survive, every nation (or person) must be secure in its person, property and borders.  Security is also a fundamental American value, especially in these potentially very dangerous times.

The question is:  What happens when a character (or country) is forced to make starker and starker choices in favor of one value over (or to the exclusion of) another?

How much freedom are you willing to sacrifice or surrender in order to be secure?  As citizens are pushed to give up more personal autonomy, liberty or privacy, when do they cease to be free? Alternatively, how much security are you willing to sacrifice or surrender in order to be free?  If safety measures are too often thwarted by civil libertarians can a nation be adequately secure?

As the risk rises and a nation (or person) is pushed to the brink, it is forced to chose one value over the other.  These choices build up over time.  A final definitive choice should negate or eliminate one value in favor of another.   The payoff to a feature film well and satisfyingly written is to show this kind of final climactic choice at the end of the story.

For example:  In Schindler’s List, Oskar Schindler discovers war is the road to riches.  His Jewish accountant pads the factory payroll to save people from the camps.  At first, Schindler resists then, as he gets to know the factory workers, he gives away his watch, then his ring and then his cigarette case in making deals to shield them.  Schindler makes his final value choice when he gives his last trunk of money to protect those workers who are now finally and fully “his” responsibility. Schindler finishes the film penniless and dressed in the rags.  In a Power of Conscience film, like Schindler’s List, the values at stake are Personal Well-Being vs. Moral Responsibility.

In series television, this choice is paid off more slowly and over multiple episodes or seasons.  A television series shows how this choice is made through incremental action, over time, leading to a climactic series finale.

For example:  In NYPD Blue, Andy Sipowicz choses to face his demons one by one.  He battles his temper and his rage. First he reigns himself in and gets sober, then he gets married, has a baby, reconciles with his eldest son, loses that son, loses his wife and cares for his remaining child. Over 17 years the drunken, racist, misanthrope we met in the pilot becomes, in a final leap of faith, a temperate respected leader of the men in his precinct. In a Power of Will series, like NYPD Blue, each choice involves the competing values of Impulse vs Restraint.

Getting back to our earlier example: How is freedom finally sacrificed? What is the tipping point?  Alternatively, what well-meaning policies deal security a fatal blow?   The audience wants to see how this final value choice is driven by faith or by fear.   They want to see how the character is pushed to extremes that provoke action that conclusively defines his or her character.

Values + Action = Character

The obstacles in a film or television series should create the kind of risk, peril or danger that pushes the character to take actions that define what is most fundamentally important or true in a character’s life. This is the case even in comedy.  There is no greater risk or peril than the vulnerability that makes a character funny.

The character should be forced to make a stark, definitive and active choice. As one value is ultimately chosen, the character finally negates or surrenders the other contrasting value.  What price is paid for the character’s choice?  What are the consequences for the character?  The more expensive the price, the more dire the consequences are for your character, the more compelling and urgent your story will be for your audience.