Christine Molloy hails from Dublin, Ireland and is one half of Desperate Optimists, a UK-based creative partnership formed with her partner, Joe Lawlor. Between 2003 and 2010, Molloy co-wrote and directed 10 acclaimed short films, including the award-winning “Who Killed Brown Owl” and “Joy.” “Helen,” Molloy’s award-winning debut feature film, premiered at the Edinburgh International Film Festival, screened at more than 50 film festivals worldwide, and was nominated for an Evening Standard Film award and a Guardian First Film award in 2009. Molloy’s second feature film, “Mister John,” also premiered at the Edinburgh International Film Festival and was released in the UK and Ireland.

“Further Beyond” will premiere at the 2016 BFI London Film Festival on October 12. The film is co-directed by Joe Lawlor.

W&H: Describe the film for us in your own words.

CM: At it’s simplest, the film focuses on two disparate Irish stories of emigration and displacement that are nonetheless interconnected across time.

The first story is about an obscure, long-forgotten figure of 18th-century Irish history, Ambrose O’Higgins. From very humble beginnings in Ireland, he went on to become the Governor General of Chile and the Viceroy of Peru, and, along the way, unwittingly sowed the seeds for his son, Bernardo O’Higgins, to become the first leader of Independent Chile.

The second story is a bit closer to home, as it involves my mother-in-law, Helen. Helen is the mother of my husband, Joe Lawlor. Joe co-directed the film. Helen’s story really begins the day she is put on a ship, aged 11 months, and sent across the Atlantic, unaccompanied, to distant relatives in Ireland.

We delve into both of these stories in an attempt to understand the impulse to travel and it’s transformative power. Along the way, we also interrogate — hopefully in a playful, fun way — the idea of the biopic and the interrelated themes of identity, place, location, history, and memory.

W&H: What drew you to this story?

CM: In 1987, the economic landscape in Ireland was pretty dire and emigration, particularly among the young, was a fact of life for so many Irish families. I myself left Ireland for the UK in 1987 in search of a better life and better opportunities. Moving from Ireland to England led to an obsession with the question of identity that has never waned over the years I’ve lived and worked in the UK.

This obsession can be traced in most of the work I have made together with Joe over the years. In recent times — particularly with the build up to the EU referendum here in the UK and rumblings about economic migrants that have bubbled under the surface for years — the fact of my identity as an economic migrant has come into stark relief in a way I couldn’t have foreseen when I first arrived here off the ferry almost 30 years ago.

For these and other reasons, when the opportunity came along to apply for a commission (through the Arts Council of Ireland Reel Art scheme), we knew we wanted to make a film with Ambrose O’Higgins as our point of departure. For over 20 years, we have thought about making a film exploring the life of Ambrose O’Higgins, having first come across this fascinating character in our theater-making days, when we were researching material for a new theater production back in 1998.

For whatever reason, he stayed with us and, over the ensuing years, we entertained the idea of developing a biopic. A straightforward biopic, however, was something we were never going to attempt, mainly because, as filmmakers, it’s not a genre we’re hugely interested in working with, although I do enjoy a good biopic as a viewer.

Instead, what we were drawn to was a meditation on the idea of location and travel. During the filmmaking process, because of the way we like to work, slowly but surely other ideas and story threads came into the frame — most notably the story of Helen — and instead of trying to force greater connections between these two stories to somehow make everything cohere in a more tidy way, we wanted to set both characters adrift as a way of thinking about the place of emigration and travel in the Irish psyche over the centuries. The many stories of emigration may be different, but the impulses remain very much the same.

W&H: What do you want people to think about when they are leaving the theater?

CM: I would like people to think about the mutable nature of identity. And to think about putting oneself into the shoes of an immigrant and thinking about them not as a statistic, but rather as an individual with a unique story to tell, worthy of our attention. I would also like people to think that the film was fun.

W&H: What was the biggest challenge in making the film?

CM: The commission we received was to make an “experimental documentary on an art theme.” You think you know what that means until you start to try and respond to the brief and get started with the filmmaking. Finding the right structural elements — particularly the role of the two narrators — and the right tone (a very playful one, we hope) was a big challenge to begin with. And, until the answers to those two challenges became clear, we just filmed, wrote, and edited, in no particular order, until the film slowly began to take shape.

There was one particular day early in the process that was quite defining. We believed we wanted to work with two actors to voice the narration, but we were very hesitant to actually commit ourselves and bring two actors onboard. Then, one day, we were walking close to where we lived and we bumped into the actress Denise Gough.

We had worked on a theater show with Denise the year before and had gotten to know her through that process, and we thought she was just brilliant. However, the day we met her in our local park, she was in a bad place, as she had been unable to get much work for almost a year. In that moment, we offered Denise a role in our documentary. As small as it was, Denise said yes. Right there and then we were committed! There was no turning back. And we knew that uncovering a way of working with Denise and Alan Howley, our second narrator, was now our biggest challenge with the film. But it was also a delicious challenge that brought us right back to our theater-making days when playing with narrative structure and performance was central to our work.

W&H: How did you get your film funded? Share some insights into how you got the film made.

CM: This is our first documentary film, but our third feature-length film and, in many respects, it was the most straightforward in terms of funding. Our background is not in film — it is in theater and community arts. We have a long track record of putting funding together from many different sources. Most successfully with our “Civic Life” series of films that culminated in our debut feature, “Helen.” So we have worked both within the more conventional film financing model and in less conventional ways.

And so the Reel Art scheme was on our radar for a number of years. It is a competitive scheme involving an initial application process followed by interviews. Finding out in April 2015 that we were successful with our bid, we then knew we had until February 2016 to complete and deliver a finished film in time for a world premiere at the Irish Film Instituteas part of the Dublin International Film Festival, which is all part of the commission.

Working in this way is very liberating for a filmmaker. Having full creative control over the process was something that we really needed, following a number of years with our heads stuck in the development of a new script. It was a tonic. [It’s not] often that the financing is that straightforward, but it’s great to be able to seize such opportunities when they come your way. Making “Further Beyond” hasn’t made us rich — the budget was €80,000, all in all — but it certainly enriched us as filmmakers.

W&H: What does it mean for you to have your film play at LFF?

CM: It’s an absolute honor. We live and work in London and have done since January 2000. We were lucky enough to screen our debut film, “Helen,” at the LFF and our experience back then was great.

I think the LFF really looks after its filmmakers and takes care of each film in its program. Also, the filmmaker pass allows the filmmakers to go to all the Press & Industry screenings, which is such a brilliant perk. I’m already making the most of my pass, and I imagine the next two weeks will be spent running around to as many screenings as I possibly can manage. Alongside juggling my parenting responsibilities, that is!

W&H: What’s the best and worst advice you’ve received?

CM: The best advice was back in 2002 when I was pregnant with our first and only child. We met a colleague, Mike Stubbs (current director of FACT, Liverpool) who, at the time, had two young children. He said to myself and Joe, with a knowing look in his eye, “Don’t blame each other.” At the time, it didn’t mean anything to me, as I was cocooned in a blissful bubble of pregnancy with no real idea of the shit that was about to hit the fan with the birth of our daughter.

Parenthood is a head-on collision between your life as it was and your life as it is about to become. Well, that was my experience! And because myself and Joe not only live together, made a baby together, and also work together, endeavoring every day not to “blame each other”— as you deal with the many set backs, rejections, and disappointments that life as a filmmaker throws at you — has stood us in good stead over the years. Especially as my tendency is always to find someone to blame!

I’m struggling to think of a bad bit of advice I’ve been given. You make lots of mistakes along the way. And some of them are learned the hard way. And you come across lots of jerks or people who just don’t understand what you’re trying to do and, instead of stepping aside, actively try to stand in your way.

The Irish are very mañana and like to say, “Sure, it will be grand!” However, I would say that with filmmaking things won’t be “grand.” You have to be prepared. You have to be rugged. You have to be resilient, more than anything else.

You have to be kind to yourself, also. The four weeks of shooting our second feature, “Mister John,” were four of the more grueling weeks of my life. It led me to think, at one particularly low point, that if I never made another film in my life, I couldn’t care less. But then you get to the finishing line and the process didn’t finish me off, after all. And you get a bit of distance, and find yourself in the edit, and you think of all the hard fought experience you’ve gained making the film, and all that you’ve learnt and, of course, the only thing that makes sense is to do it all over again! If you can, that is! It’s a tough, competitive world and it’s only getting tougher to secure the necessary funding.

W&H: What advice do you have for other female directors?

CM: I think it’s important to be the filmmaker you need and want to be on set and in the edit. Despite what people try to imply, there is no correct, single way of making a film. Filmmaking has been defined by men, as they’ve gotten to make most of the films to date, and, often, they’ve done it in their own “manly” way. But that doesn’t mean films have to be made that way. One of the ways to ensure you get to make your film the way you need to is to surround yourself with people who understand you and respect you as a filmmaker.

W&H: Name your favorite woman-directed film and why.

CM: Top of my list is “Wanda” by Barbara Loden. It is an astounding film, made under the radar — despite her Hollywood pedigree — by a filmmaker ahead of her time. It is not an easy film to watch, as the central character is so broken and lost and extremely hard to empathize with at times along the way. But it is bold, uncompromising, personal filmmaking at its best and it is also laced with lots of dark, brilliant humor. What a terrible tragedy that Barbara Loden died not long after making “Wanda.” The world was sadly robbed of a powerful, distinctive filmmaking voice.

I also want to include Claire Denis’ film “Chocolat.” Another startlingly original and brilliant debut film by a female director. I saw “Chocolat” when it first came out, before I ever imagined being a filmmaker myself. It is a film that really stayed with me over the years. I then got to know the work of Claire Denis, but it was some time before I realized that she had made “Chocolat.” I think she is a completely inspiring filmmaker.

W&H: Have you seen opportunities for women filmmakers increase over the last year due to the increased attention paid to the issue? If someone asked you what you thought needed to be done to get women more opportunities to direct, what would be your answer?

CM: I think there is now a lot of awareness and discussion, even leading to policy changes in many areas and institutions. That is all great. In Ireland, the Waking The Feminists movement has completely shaken everything up. What a brilliant, inspiring campaign that is. But, despite all that amazing work, change isn’t going to happen overnight.

I think, for me, the main thing that needs to change in the filmmaking industry is in the area of the “director for hire.” Until agents and production companies, producers, financiers, and studios, etc. step up to the plate and start putting female directors forward, the industry will continue to be dominated by men. So, if you’re asking me what needs to be done, the answer in my mind is simple: Start hiring more women directors!