What I’ve Learned About Documentaries That End Up On Streaming Platforms

The Sound of Identity aired nationally on STARZ. The American Question debuted at number one on Apple TV’s documentary chart in 2024. A limited documentary series I’m executive producing for Lionsgate Television is in active development right now. None of those happened the way I would have predicted ten years ago.

What I would have predicted, when I was younger and watching directors I admired land platform deals, was a meeting with a platform executive who would explain what they wanted, after which I would deliver it. That is, broadly, not how it has worked for me. The films were made first. The platforms came later. The conversations that placed the work on STARZ and Apple TV were acquisition conversations, not commission conversations. The Lionsgate Television series is a different kind of relationship again, one that started with a project my team had been building independently before the studio came in.

I’m writing this because the difference matters, especially if you’re a producer or financier evaluating where my films tend to end up and how they get there. The honest answer is that I make documentaries the way I think they should be made first, and the platform fit gets sorted out at the end, with the help of representation and distributors who know the landscape better than any director does. That sequence is not glamorous. It’s also the sequence that has consistently produced outcomes I’m proud of.

Some of what I’ve learned along the way, in case any of it’s useful.

Films get acquired, not commissioned, when nobody told you to make them

The Sound of Identity wasn’t a STARZ commission. We made the film because Lucia Lucas was going to perform Don Giovanni at Tulsa Opera in 2019, and that performance was going to be historic regardless of whether anyone was filming it. The film existed because the access existed, because the trust existed, because the moment was real. STARZ came later, after the festival run, after the audience awards, after the film had already established what it was on its own.

The American Question was similar. The election cycle was happening. The country was having a conversation that needed to be documented from inside, not outside. We built the project around access, not around a buyer. Apple TV’s number-one debut came because the film was finished and good and timely. The platform fit was found after, not designed before.

This sequence sounds obvious in retrospect. It’s worth saying out loud anyway, because the version that gets pitched at film schools and in podcasts is usually the opposite — find a buyer, design a project to their specs, deliver. That model exists. It produces some films I admire. It’s just not how my films have actually gotten made, and pretending otherwise would be misleading to anyone reading this and trying to figure out how to work with me.

The implication for producers and financiers is this: if you’re attaching me to a project, you’re attaching a director who builds toward access and editorial integrity first. Distribution strategy gets engaged in parallel through representation, but it doesn’t drive the film’s creative spine. That order of operations is non-negotiable for me. It’s how I’ve ended up with films that hold up over time.

What acquisitions actually evaluate

Once a film is made and looking for a home, the conversation is fundamentally different from a commission conversation. Acquisitions teams are evaluating a finished or near-finished work, not a pitch. They’re asking whether this film fits their slate, whether the audience matches their subscriber base, whether the press cycle will support a launch. They’re asking these questions about a film that already exists and already has its own evidence.

The work that travels well in acquisition isn’t always the work that pitches well in commission. I’ve watched commission-pitched documentaries deliver acceptable films that nobody at the platform feels strongly about, because the film was built to satisfy a brief rather than to be a film. I’ve watched acquisition-pitched documentaries get into bidding situations because the work was undeniable on its own terms.

Both routes can produce good outcomes. The acquisition route happens to be the route most of my work has traveled, and I think it’s worth being honest about that with the people who fund and produce alongside me. A producer who attaches to me thinking we’re going to commission a project to a platform’s spec is going to be disappointed when I push back on spec-driven decisions. A producer who attaches knowing we’re going to make the best film we can make and then route it through representation and distributors to find its home is a producer who’s going to have a different and better experience.

What I bring, and what representation handles

I’m not the right person to negotiate platform deals. I’m represented by United Talent Agency and Rain Management for filmmaking, and the people at both organizations know far more about platform economics, acquisition timing, and distributor strategy than I will ever know or want to know. The work I do well happens between pre-production and final cut. The work UTA and Rain do well happens before the project is fully formed and after the cut is locked. We don’t trade positions.

Producers and financiers asking who handles what end up working better when they understand this division. Editorial decisions go through me. Distribution and platform strategy go through representation and the project’s distributor of record. Notes that mix the two — “the platform wants you to recut this scene” — get untangled by going to the source. Sometimes the platform actually wants something, and that’s a real note that needs to be discussed editorially. Sometimes the agency or distributor is interpreting platform reactions through a lens that doesn’t match what the platform actually said. Sorting those is part of the work, and the way to sort them is to talk to the right person directly.

What good production partners share

The production companies and financiers I’ve worked with successfully share a few habits, and they all relate to the order-of-operations point above.

They invest in pre-production. The films that travel well in acquisition are films that had real pre-production. Compressing that stage to protect the production budget is a mistake I’ve watched producers regret repeatedly. Pre-production is where the access is built, the trust is established, the editorial spine is laid down. It’s also where the most consequential creative decisions happen. The films that hold up are the ones whose pre-production was honored.

They protect the editorial relationship. The cut is where the film becomes itself, and the relationship between the director and the editor is the engine of that becoming. Production companies that interfere with this relationship, or who let financiers interfere with it, produce films that have lost their center. Production companies that protect it produce films that finish strong and travel well to acquirers afterward.

They’re honest about the commercial profile they’re building toward. Festival films, theatrical releases, streaming acquisitions, brand-funded documentaries each have different economics. Production companies that are honest with the director early about the commercial profile set up production decisions that match. The dishonest ones force directors to make creative decisions on incomplete information and live with the consequences during release.

How any of this connects to working together

If you’re a producer or financier evaluating whether to attach me to a project, the most useful thing to know is that I’m built for the route my films have actually traveled. Make the film well. Trust the editorial relationship. Engage representation and distributors at the right moments. Land the film at the right home through that process, rather than designing the film backward from a buyer’s brief.

The /documentary-filmmaker/ page on this site is the most efficient single place to evaluate the documentary work, including how it traveled and where it ended up. The /director-los-angeles/ page covers the broader directing practice across narrative and commercial work. The reel and full materials are at /epk/. Direct project inquiries through /inquiries/ reach me first and route to UTA or Rain as appropriate based on project type.

The first response to an inquiry is usually within 72 hours, and the response will be honest about whether the project is a fit for the way I actually work. That honesty has saved me and the producers I’ve worked with a lot of time over the years. It’s the only mode I know how to operate in, and the films that get made in it tend to be the films I’m proudest of.