Mevlud Sabashvili

Can you explain to the audience your career?

I don’t really have a prolific film profile, so there isn’t much to talk about. I work as an air traffic controller, and in my free time, I make films. I have only one project that can be considered professional work, a short film titled Last Day to Pay. And now, I’ve completed work on Dividing Line.

How many years have you been making movies?

I started making movies 5 years ago (when I was 27). I started with tiny projects and tried my hand at a variety of genres, like documentary, animation, and report-style videos. Eventually, I moved to short-film fiction. The next step in my career is to jump into the harsh world of feature film.

Why did you start making movies?

As a kid, I was always captivated by the behind-the-scenes reels of films. It was far more interesting for me, how the film was made, rather than what it was. I kept that curiosity over the years, and at some point, I realized that I don’t need to watch BTS, I have enough knowledge to make my own (this assurance turned out to be misleading). So yeah, in the end, I guess it was a good mix of curiosity and opportunity.

Tell us a little about your project. What will the audience be able to see in your film?

The audience will see my attempt to show something impactful in a more or less unique way (how successful the attempt is, that’s for the audience to decide). The film, Dividing Line, is about a woman who needs to make an important decision. And she does. But in parallel, the audience will also see how the narrative would continue if she didn’t. And all of this, at the same time.

Why did you do this project?

While I wanted to do a film in general, this project, in particular, came out of the critique I received on my previous short film, Last Day to Pay. While it had generally favorable reception and even limited local success, the main critique was that it has nothing to distinguish it from other well-made short films. So when I started conceptualizing Dividing Line, I kept that in mind and came up with the idea of using a split screen to help it stand out. One of the problems some directors encounter is directing actors and dealing with some actors, especially in the amateur world. How do you see this topic?

What kind of work do you do with them?

This is the most important thing to work on as a director. You can have a technically competent film, but if the acting is off, the whole thing fails to connect with the audience. And it’s a case of, even if your film isn’t fully competent, if the acting is good, it will be received more favourably. So, acting is incredibly important. I want to work on it a lot more; I even find it useful for directors to get some acting experience to better understand their performers. In terms of my approach, as with any other department, it is essential to create a safe space where actors feel free to interpret the text in their unique way. However, it is also important to understand that the director makes the final decision regarding character choices. While I am married to storyboards and edit made in my head, there are specific beats actors need to hit so I can get the picture I want. On this project on average, we did 4 takes and usually second or third one is used in the film. Of course, I fully encourage creative output from anyone on set. In my experience, the best things about the film are things we came up together on set; bouncing off someone's idea and exploring it further.

A good movie takes care of all departments. But normally we can not allocate all the resources to have a good photography or spend a lot of money on sound post production or budget to hire actors. In your project what % have you allocated to. I don't just mean money but time as well. Of 100% of the time/money, what % did you dedicate to each department?

Direction: The project was self-financed, and I was also a director, so you can say 100% or 0%, since I was the only one not getting paid for it. Depends on how you look at it;

Photography: 20%;

Sound: 20%;

Postproduction: 20%, although I was an editor and did a lot of touch-ups on post-production, so this one is also fluid;

Work with actors: 30%;

Art direction/locations: 10%;

(These numbers are highly approximate. I was also an accountant on the project. And I am not good at it. I hope I am a better director than an accountant.)

If you could go back, what would you change about this project? (1 thing only)

About the project: I would have communicated the split-screen idea better with the crew. Because they fully understood the scenes when they saw the edit.

About the film: One character, the husband, on the right side of the split screen, disappears from the film for a prolonged time without any reason. When he reappears, people might even forget he is still in the movie. I’d have more shots of him on that part if I could change it.

What are you happiest about this project?

Due to the specificity of this film being split-screen for most of the runtime, I was concerned about the clarity of the narrative. According to screentests and the theatrical premier we had, people don’t have a problem following the film and understanding the double narrative. That was the main goal initially: to create a comprehensive viewing experience utilising two viewports.

Make a wish to the movie gods. What do you ask?

Keep physical media forever. Also, to make films made for streaming services available physically. For example, Alfonso Cuaron’s Roma shouldn’t be lost when/if Netflix shuts down its servers

What movie would you have liked to direct?

I don’t get this feeling of missing a chance on already-made movies, but sometimes it gets me upset when I hear that the movie is being made based on a book I liked and imagined making a film out of it. Like now, Denis Villneuve is reported to make the film Rendezvous with Rama. Denis, of course, is fantastic, but he is so busy now with Dune and James Bond, who knows, maybe there is a chance. Fingers crossed.

What kind of cinema do you like? Genre, directors, actors?

I like any kind of cinema. I can equally enjoy The Seventh Seal and Transformers 3: Dark Side of the Moon. Trash grindhouse films and prestige dramas hold equal place in my heart. (Although I enjoy video games morethan movies, so there is that)

Imagine that all the movies are going to be lost. If you could save 3 movies what would they be?

Black Hawk Down - Dir. Ridley Scott, 2001;

Spider-Man 2 - Dir. Sam Raimy, 2004;

Inglourious Bastards - Dir. Quentin Tarantino, 2009;

If you have more projects underway, can you give us a bit of information?

Right now, I am trying to develop a feature film that will run in theatres and people can buy tickets and see it. I want to make a crowd-pleaser film that doesn’t sacrifice artistic value for commercial success. I am curious about this balance and exploring it deeper. The film is supposed to be a spy-action thriller featuring a female protagonist completing a challenging mission that will give her perspective on personal problems.