Rebbie Ratner began her film career when she was seven years old, often running around her house capturing family scenes on tape. In college, she started making formal films, regarding film as a medium rife for expression of uncomfortable ideas and affects. Ratner is now a producer and director whose credits include fitness and wellness videos, “99 Threadwaxing,” and “Now, Forager.” “Borderline” is Ratner’s feature documentary directorial debut, which she also wrote, produced, filmed, and co-edited.

“Borderline” will premiere at the 2016 DOC NYC film festival on November 11.

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

RR: “Borderline” tracks the experience of one woman who carries the Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) diagnosis. It is about the Borderline experience: one of extreme shifts in emotion, typically generated by interpersonal exchanges or misreadings surrounding those exchanges. The film follows one woman who has the diagnosis and explores the Borderline experience through her. It is a portrait of one variant of BPD, not a portrait of the person in the film, per se. Otherwise, I would have titled it with her name.

For me, at day’s end, “Borderline” is about how people navigate interpersonal relationships and the challenges that they confront when the heart of their struggle lies in how they mismanage relationships. This film experientially explores the dys/functional relationship one has with themselves and others and the gross impact that relational dysfunction can have on a person’s life.

W&H: What drew you to this story?

RR: I returned to grad school to finish what I hadn’t — my MFA — 12 years after the fact and was running on fumes, ideas sucked to nothing. I had been steeped in the mental health world for almost 10 years, trying to right my own unknown internal wrongs, and I’d finally received the Borderline Personality Disorder — terrible name! — diagnosis. Despite my desire to avoid doing the easy thing and return to the scene of the crime, I felt that if I made a film where BPD was intricately exposed, I stood the best shot at making something decent and completing it.

It’s unlikely there’s another filmmaker out there who has the diagnosis, has had the privilege of a BPD education in the form of excellent treatment, and has skills as a filmmaker. So many mental health films are made by outsiders and have an obvious didacticism to them. I wanted to make an experiential film that emotionally took people to Borderline spaces. BPD as a topic really served as a way in, an excuse or premise to make an experiential piece that stood on its own, irrespective of issue or subject matter. Hopefully, it can hold the audience’s attention because it has an emotional impact. I can’t speak for the audience, but that’s my goal.

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

RR: I want people to leave feeling something directly inspired by their experience of what’s on the screen — maybe walk away a little more conscientious of their judgments, and a little more curious about how others are impacted by the way they interact and treat them. And I want audiences to draw from [their past] behavior, [to consider] how their thoughts and feelings predicate their actions. Basically, self/other awareness is where it’s at to me and I hope this film explores that premise in great detail and encourages audiences to do the same.

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

RR: The challenges varied and shifted as the project evolved. First, committing to the idea. Then acting on that commitment. Once technical challenges were addressed and I decided to do the bulk of the vérité shooting — so that I wouldn’t have to pay a DP or be reliant on their schedule when I needed to get up and go ASAP for a shoot — figuring out how to determine what to film and what shoots were worth scheduling. Finally, because my time was limited, deciding who to follow intensely and noting the ingredients that could make for a fruitful collaboration.

[Also,] ethical issues galore and making poor judgment calls which then necessitated relationship repairs, staying conscious of the fact that I’m filming a person, not an object, being aware of how my own dysfunction and vulnerabilities impact the project, and staying on top of my own shit — which I did not always do to good effect. With regard to editing — I co-edited — working with people where I can understand their minds and assets so that I can really take advantage of their talents and also remain true to my own feelings in terms of what stays and what goes and how scenes are shaped.

Finally, navigating the festival experience and figuring out a hybrid distribution model that best serves this film — which I’m doing right now.

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

RR: Private donations, Chase Bank, and I did most — but not all — of the vérité camera operating, so production costs were low. It’s the editing portion that generated the most cost to my bank account. I didn’t feel I had any grounds to stand on yet in terms of grant applications because I had a minimal track record.

My intention was to get this film on my résumé, and be rigorous in working multiple routes to secure the ever-elusive funding for future projects and for costs to secure various distribution routes. So we are working on raising funds for the fourth leg of the film: distribution!

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

RR: Outside of the prestige — which I’ll take — and great curating and programming, NYC is my hometown and the film’s alma mater. I’d been hoping for a DOC NYC screening to premiere the film in NYC. It feels validating, though I certainly am not relying on festival acceptance for validation of the film.

Screening at DOC NYC means I have a chance to invite my closest friends and family to a screening where many of them will be under one roof, endorsed by a festival for which I am proud to be associated. The film’s keeping good company here.

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

RR: Typically, the worst advice — albeit the advice I’m often seeking — is advice that proffers a specific answer or directive. “Don’t do this because…” I want someone to give me the answer and am simultaneously suspicious of anyone who thinks they know enough to supply another individual — me — with the answer.

In other words, the worst advice can be the advice that tells you what to do. It can disconnect me from my heart and mind if I’m not careful. Certainly, when the decision involves complex and nuanced perspectives, I’ll seek counsel, but at day’s end it’s my own instincts balanced with the knowledge, wisdom, and experience of those I respect.

The best advice: trust your instincts. The trouble is I tend to question my instincts. Be kind, be firm. Treat people well.

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

RR: I don’t feel like I’m all that experienced, so I’m not sure I’m in a position to speak to this. I work with both men and women but am very attuned to sexism when it rears its head — [like] a dude not addressing me in conversation, but speaking to other men in the conversation circle — they probably don’t even know they’re doing it. But I do! I take note and those dudes will never work in my town.

The point is sexism — aka misogyny — can be subtle but silencing and, if I am silenced or uncomfortable exploring feelings and thoughts, the work will suffer. To that end, I cast all crew members — male and female — and make sure I feel emotionally connected to the people I’m working with. Their hearts and heads contribute monumentally to what we capture and how we shape the work. It’s chemistry.

Male/female/trans/whoever-you-are, we must connect on some core existential level. Our curiosities must both align and complement each other because, especially when we are filming, our psychic connection allows for a shorthand communication to capture the most important thing unfolding before us: things that create feelings. Stay fierce and don’t let people interrupt you. Treat people well, listen to them, but not at the expense of politesse that will topple your vision.

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

RR: As of late, “Mustang,” directed by Deniz Gamze Ergüven. What I would give to make a film like that! I watched it at IFC sitting between two friends. All three of us were rapt, totally drawn into this story dripping with bold female moves from characters in a straightjacketed environment. The last scene of the film left me breathless. I think making a film that isn’t emotional porn and genuinely generates strong feelings in the audience is so insanely hard and heroic. It’s a total gift to give to the audience. I feel like this filmmaker really took care of her audience, perhaps a byproduct of [being] a strong writer who’s a skilled filmmaker.

Agnès Varda is tenacious and unapologetic in her films. “Vagabond” is still one of my most remembered film viewing experiences. Something about the refusal to justify or explain away Sandrine Bonnaire’s character’s behavior in that film left me both frustrated but accepting. It’s so reflective of how I experience people in life: In spite of my best efforts to try to understand someone, the certainty I crave can never really be verified, not when it comes to drawing up a blueprint of someone’s soul.

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?

RR: I think people are starting to come up with answers. AFI has the woman director’s workshop that now feeds directly into an opportunity to work on series/shows. Everyone’s talking about Ava DuVernay’s all female-directed “Queen Sugar.” [It’s] sad that this has to be a point of applause, but it’s awesome and amazing that she’s shown up. Thank god for her. Glad she’s here to shake it up.

Grant opportunities and organizations [that are] generally led by women, Chicken & Egg Pictures for one, are insisting on only supporting female filmmakers. Gamechanger Films [helps finance women-directed films.] It’s no accident that many — if not most — of these initiatives are spearheaded by women. Women help women. Women hire women. Men also help women. But without women at the helm, I think we’d be screwed.

Even I had my own moment of sexism a few weeks back when I dropped a hard drive off at drive recovery company and a woman engineer came out to address my concerns. It took me a minute to recalibrate my funky expectations.

In terms of what to do to give women more opportunities: hire women! Make it a rule that at least 51 percent of the crew/personnel should be female and that that percentage should be reflected in top positions. Period. Or, hire all female. Nothing wrong with that.