This article appears as part of the “Where Are They Now?” series of interviews with alumni of the LA Film Festival. Director Kirby Dick brought his second film Sick: The Life & Death of Bob Flanagan, Supermasochist to the festival in 1997, and walked away with the prize for Best Feature Film. The Festival welcomed back Mr. Dick for his 2005 look at the scandals of the Catholic Church, Twist of Faith, and then again in 2006 for his Academy Award® nominated This Film Is Not Yet Rated. His latest documentary Outrage, which opened in LA last week, explores the hypocrisy of gay politicians who are living in the closet and voting against gay rights. And yes, he names names.

By Carolyn Cohagan

How did the inspiration for Outrage come about?

As a documentary filmmaker, you always have your antenna out for good ideas. Particularly after I finish a project, I’m really looking around diligently. I was in D.C. in 2006 promoting This Film Is Not Yet Rated about the American film rating system and the censorship of it, which was a story I knew about because I worked in the film business, and I figured there must be stories in D.C. that people there know about that most people in the country don’t know about. I started asking around and came across the fact that there are many closeted high level politicians and that a number of them are hypocrites who are voting anti-gay. What convinced me to make the film was I did some research and realized that there was very little mainstream media coverage of this subject at all...

... which I found to be a fascinating part of the film. I was surprised I hadn’t heard more about several of the subjects of your film.

Yeah – not just you. Most people are really stunned by the revelations in the film and that’s because the mainstream media has stayed away from this.

When you made the film did you have a particular goal in mind? Was it discussion or actual change?

Both. I think discussion can lead to change. I have three goals for the film: One, that it advances the cause of gay rights. Two, that it reports in a more mainstream context on the hypocrisy of a number of high profile closeted politicians. And finally, I hope that it actually leads to the demise of closeted American politics, because the closet contorts the American political system. One of the ways it does this is that the people going into politics, often in their early twenties, have to make a decision as to whether they are closeted or out and because there hasn’t been a discussion they feel like they can get away with being closeted – that no one will call them on it. And I am hopeful that now that there is going to be much more discussion and much more coverage of this issue, they will realize that being closeted is probably a bad decision to make politically, and certainly it’s a very painful decision to make personally, and perhaps they’ll decide to enter politics and run as out gay candidates, whether it’s Republican, Democrat, or Independent.

While you were making the film and raising funds, did anyone try to discourage you?

I’m sure there are a lot of people who are not very happy the film was made or distributed, but there was a great deal of support within the gay community in D.C., both Democrat and Republican, because they know the cost of the closet, both personally and politically. Many have been closeted themselves. Many of them know politicians who are closeted who, in order to protect their closet, vote against gay rights issues. And the gay community realizes the importance of this issue being discussed and out in the open.

Do you have similar feelings about the closeted gay community in Hollywood? Actors are not making policy, but do you feel there is a danger there as well?

Well, it’s an interesting question. I chose to focus on people who were actually voting on policy, laws that effected the lives of millions of Americans. There is a very bright line in terms of hypocrisy and in terms of reporting on that. When it comes to celebrities, an argument can be made that if an A-list actor that’s closeted came out they might have more influence on society and advance the cause of gay rights more than if someone like Larry Craig suddenly decided to come out and start voting pro-gay. If they were to do what I think is the most positive and right thing to do and come out, it would have a great deal of influence on the culture. But they don’t have direct influence on people’s lives in terms of making laws. We considered going into that in our film but we really had our hands full with the political situation.

Do you find that people are surprised that you are heterosexual?

They are. People presume that if a film is about gay rights that it is being made by a gay or lesbian filmmaker. I understand that but to me the struggle for gay rights is the most important human rights issue in our country at this time. I think the human rights of anyone effects all of us, and we should all be very vigilant in ensuring that everyone has 100 percent civil and human rights in this country.

How big was your crew?

It varied from me alone up to six people max. I vary the size of the crew depending on what’s going on. I like shooting alone. I like shooting with one other person. Particularly in vérité situations, I find the smaller the crew the better the material you get.

Do you have particular techniques to put your subjects at ease besides the smaller crew?

Hang out with the subjects, keep shooting all the time so it’s never unusual to have the camera on. Travel with them – a trip is always great. If you can figure out a way to plan a three or four hour trip – there’s something about just sitting in a car, just to pass the time, people open up in ways they might usually not.

I also ask them what ideas they have and what they would like to shoot. Often time people have directorial ideas, ways they’d like to see something shot or represented. Not only do you end up getting some very interesting ideas, but then, because it is their idea, they are more invested and might put in more than they otherwise might do.

How did you get James McGreevey and his wife involved?

My producer, Amy Ziering, was very skilled at dealing with all the high-powered subjects we had to deal with. She was a natural at establishing a confidence and a trust that this would not be tabloid journalism, that we would be examining this issue with real depth, and that we would be careful with whatever footage we got. The people in political situations who spoke to us were vulnerable. If it had more of a histrionic or strident feel to it, it could have hurt the subjects politically because D.C. is such a network town. Amy was incredible. She got the McGreeveys. It was her skill that pulled it off.

It was powerful to hear from both of them.

I wanted to get both sides of the story. In the media it had been played out as this real drama – they were suing each other, etc. I was more interested in the pain that they were both experiencing, Jim McGreevey because he’d been in the closet for so long and Dina McGreevey because she had lived with him for a number of years not realizing that he was gay.

Do you have a favorite moment in the film?

One of the things that fascinates me the most involves Rich Tafel, who is a Republican who is out and is a fierce advocate for anyone in politics being out. He often time councils people in politics on how to come out.  He told me he would have people who were in the closet, and who had no intention of coming out, coming up to him and saying, “You think you are asking people to be strong, but I actually think your being out is weak. It’s stronger to just keep your own personal life private and keep your eye on your own political ends and don’t let your personal life distract you in any way.” It’s perverse, but fascinating, and there’s even some truth in it. To be successful you have to do things that often times personally seem very abhorrent.

How wide is the release for Outrage?

It’s opening in five cities, and then platforming to 50 or 100 or more. Magnolia is a phenomenal company. This is a very controversial film. We were worried they might try to exert some kind of editorial control and restrict the punch of the film and it was just the opposite. They were completely supportive of my vision of the film. And it’s great to work with a distributor who is so skilled at what they do. They are great at getting documentaries out there.

What’s next?

I’m going after another closet, not a gay closet, but I can’t talk about it. I don’t want to give the institutions and people I’m looking into the head’s up.

My curiosity is completely piqued, but I guess I have to wait. Have you screened Outrage in DC?

For the most part people really liked it. A lot of stuff in the film they already know, so they were glad to see that a film was made about this story that the mainstream media hasn’t covered.

Again, there are politicians that are covered in the film whose supporters are not very happy about this, but I think it’s a mistake on [the politicians’] part. If they choose to lie to their constituencies and their partners, then reporters and documentary filmmakers should report on their hypocrisy.

Outrage is currently playing at the Laemmle Sunset 5 in Hollywood.

Carolyn Cohagan is the Web Content Editor for Filmindependent.org