It makes me feel old to say it, but when I entered college in 2006 the discussion over rising student loan debts had barely begun. By the time I graduated in 2010, however, that problem had evolved into a full-blown national crisis. Current students and those that have graduated have accrued more than one trillion dollars in debt by seeking out higher education, and though many continue to protest, colleges and universities across the country continue to raise tuition year after year. It’s a vicious cycle that seems to have no resolution in sight, but thanks to the new film Ivory Tower, Americans can now hope for better opportunities in the years to come.

Filmmaker Andrew Rossi is probably best known for his work on Page One: Inside The New York Times. He’s a young and insightful man whose interest in human beings and the struggles they face in life paints beautiful cinematic portraits of modern life in the United States. Ivory Tower finds Rossi applying this approach to the world of student loan debt, its history, and the actions being taken by people of all ages to fix what has clearly become a broken system. It’s a story that is at once terrifying and thought-provoking, which I believe everyone should see as soon as they possibly can. Debt is a monster, and when as it grows many people can feel alone in their struggle to pay off expenses such as education, but through Ivory Tower, students, parents, faculty, and those making decisions in Washington are brought together through mutual desire to ensure a better future for the next generation of leaders.

I had the opportunity to speak with Andrew Rossi last week about the creation of Ivory Tower and the messages he hopes audiences take away from the film.

UTG: Thank you for taking a few minutes to talk to me this afternoon.

AR: Of course. Thank you for having me.

UTG: I just had the chance to watch Ivory Tower the other night and I was a big fan, even though it admittedly terrified me a bit. What initially set you on the journey towards making this film?

AR: I started working on this film when student loan debt exceeded a trillion dollars, and people like Peter Keel were offering students money to drop out of college. There was a real sense that higher education was broken. That the system needed to be redesigned. I thought that would be an ideal context to bring cameras on the ground to a range of universities across the country to try and see what’s going on: What are students learning, what are faculty teaching, and how is it working? Is it as broken as people say? I also wanted to corral a range of sociological research and data that could be put into the film to be a tool for perspective students and their parents.

UTG: The first thing I thought while watching the film was that it felt like the largest project you have chosen to tackle on film to date. Would you say that is accurate?

AR: It’s definitely the largest approach – as far as national education and the attempt to reflect on a range of experiences and not just one particular story is a new canvas for me to work with, a broader scale. I think that Page One: Inside The New York Times has a lot of insight into the crisis of the newspaper industry, but it’s really focused on the lives of the media desk reporters working at the Times, and then looks at other aspects of the media landscape through their prism. In this case, we’re trying to look at broader structure issues. [We are looking at] the financial model of higher education and the possibilities presented by the future, as well as the historical context for how we got here.

UTG: I really enjoyed the fact that there is a beacon of hope at the end of the film. It’s about an hour of ‘this is bad, and this is how we got here,’ then the last hour offers the idea that there is hope around the corner. Was that an angle you were hoping to pursue at the beginning of the creative process, or was that more something that developed naturally during the production process?

AR: I’m happy to hear you say that because I think when the student activist from Cooper Union has the last word in the film that she’s speaking on the heels of defeat in the sense that her school has decided to charge tuition after years of being free, but she feels energized and inspired by the activism of her fellow students. It’s not the end of an era, but the beginning of a campaign. I hope that can be a call to action to viewers as well.

UTG: That leads into my next question fairly well – What do you hope audiences, young people especially, take away from Ivory Tower?

AR: I think the example of the Cooper Union students is profound because it’s a moment in the film when the student is no longer a victim subject to institutions’ increasing tuition rates or the loan services predatory practices. It’s a moment when they’re able to capture the attention of the media, as well as the nation at large, to bring attention to problems not only at their school, but the entire model of higher education. It’s not sustainable. I think what students can do when they watch the film is to think about protesting for change on their campuses, or in certain circumstances we see students rally and travel to protest at Sallie Mae’s door. That message is percolating up to many decision makers. For example, President Obama just announced an executive action to expand income based repayment of loans. Senator Warren just [last week] present legislation to let certain students refinance their loans. So we see that at the federal level, the message that student loan debt is broken and higher education is broken is getting through. It’s really a question of then acting on that with a legislative initiative that actually helps, but in this case there is no solution that is going to be easy.

UTG: Certainly. As a filmmaker working with a discussion that is still very much in the media today, is it hard to pick a point where the film ends? You close with the student of Cooper Union, but I was curious to your planning. As you said, there are still things happening right now you could include. This problem still exists.

AR: Right. That’s a very good point. I think that yes, the student of Cooper Union and their campaign to change the creation of tuition at their school is the ultimate expression of the many problems with higher education. Then in terms of the historic occupation that those students did in their office for 65 days–which I believe is one of the longest protests put on by students–is the ultimate expression of student commitment to protesting on their campuses. To me, I thought it was a poignant way of ending the film.

UTG: Before I let you go I have to admit that I noticed via Twitter this month that you recently met President Barack Obama. What was that experience like? Has he seen the film?

AR: He has not yet. The White House has seen it. We have been working with their office of engagement and digital strategy to see how the film may be useful to them as a tool. I don’t think that Obama has seen it, but I am hopeful that he will be able to moving forward. I think President Obama has a very insightful understanding of the power of college to lift people from their current situation, whether it be because of class or other aspects that hold them down, and how college can be an engine of social influence and change, but also how student loan debt can be paralyzing. I think the action he signed this week can do a lot of good.

• Author
• Recent Posts

James Shotwell

James Shotwell is the founder of Under The Gun Review. He loves writing about music and movies almost as much as he loves his two fat cats. He's also the co-founder of Antique Records and the Marketing Coordinator for Haulix. You should probably follow him on Twitter.

Latest posts by James Shotwell (see all)

• 2015’s Most Underrated Films - December 29, 2015
• Passing The Torch: The End Of An Era For UTG - December 1, 2015
• UTG PREMIERE: Before The Streetlights – “Private Browser” - November 26, 2015