Australian filmmaker Emma Franz began her professional creative life as a jazz singer and composer. Her first film, “Intangible Asset Number 82,” won Best Foreign Documentary at the Durban International Film Festival and an AFI Award for Best Sound in Documentary. She is currently writing a book on creative construct in non-fiction cinema due for publication in 2018.

“Bill Frisell, A Portrait” will premiere at the 2017 SXSW Film Festival on March 12.

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

EF: The film aims to be an intimate and layered portrait of a masterful artist. I have tried to tap into some of the elements that help create the unique, continually inventive, and widely admired musical output of Bill Frisell. So, it’s a film about ideas, approach, processes, and character, and how those elements inform the music and the way it is received by others. It’s not a biography.

W&H: What drew you to this story?

EF: Something indefinable about Frisell’s music resonates with me. Moreover, when I’ve seen him play with different musicians and in different genres, I’ve noticed his music seems to captivate a hugely diverse range of audiences. He defies categorization whilst maintaining an identifiable sound and style, which is rare for any artist to achieve. I was drawn to the idea of exploring, through cinema, how he achieves this.

Music can be documented or analyzed, but so much about what makes it work is more intangible or abstract, and cinema is the perfect medium for providing understanding via the senses. Coming from a former life as a professional musician, I am interested in trying to make music films that might access some of the less tangible aspects of music making and the motivations behind “music as a life choice,” beyond the desire for fame and fortune.

Frisell doesn’t seem to be about image or fame and is an accomplished, complex musician. I felt his personality was a big part of why his music is so effective, and he made a good cinematic character for a director like me who is interested in nuance. I was drawn to the idea of making a film about a musician that wasn’t a biography or an exhaustive investigation into his music, but rather a portrait that might convey a “sense” of the aspects that motivate him and enable him to achieve what he does.

But perhaps, as always, for me, the biggest draw to making the film was garnering self-understanding. There’s so much we can learn about ourselves, and our own processes and motivations, in the act of making a film about someone whose art we respect or moves us.

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

EF: I’m not sure I have a specific agenda as to what I want them to be thinking about when they leave. Depending on what drew them to the film — and what they already know and think — I hope there are plenty of things to think about, including the inherent value of really listening, making, and thinking about music (above and beyond a career in music), about their own approach to whatever they do, perhaps some musical ideas that will be useful to other musicians, and so on.

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

EF: Raising the money and music license fees for other composers’ music that eventually led to a re-edit of the film.

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

EF: There was philanthropic support, and a small amount came in through an Indiegogo crowdfunding campaign. But, it was mostly it was self-funded: I did all of the main roles myself pro bono, spreading production over six years so that I could do so. There were some favors from friends and family, and there are some debts remaining.

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

EF: It’s an honor for me, particularly to be selected in competition. The festival has garnered a lot of respect for its programming, and I personally hold a lot of respect for the Film Festival Director Janet Pierson, who has a keen eye for cinema and treats filmmakers with consideration and warmth.

I also couldn’t think of a better launching pad for a music film, so it’s a great opportunity.

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

EF: That’s very difficult to answer. It’s been more of a slow build of general impressions from others. All advice needs to be taken with care, as every situation is different and often complex.

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

EF: Don’t do something to please others if will be unnecessarily detrimental to yourself or your project. Be unapologetically strong in saying no, and don’t over-explain because people aren’t treating you with the respect you deserve — it tends to only make people take advantage of you.

Most of all, try to recognize when it’s time to walk away from these people. I’ve learned this the hard way, many times over.

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

EF: “The 3 Rooms of Melancholia” by Pirjo Honkasalo. It’s poetic, haunting, cinematic, intuitive, compassionate, strong, and a stunning way to illuminate the devastation of war.

W&H: There have been significant conversations over the last couple of years about increasing the amount of opportunities for women directors yet the numbers have not increased. Are you optimistic about the possibilities for change? Share any thoughts you might have on this topic.

EF: I think change will continue to be slow. There are incredibly talented, smart, motivated, and passionate women capable of making entertaining, moving, and impactful films, but still not enough trust placed in them or opportunities offered to them. Many of the attitudes and blocks women come up against are subtle and hard to call out, which also makes change more difficult.

With statistics as they are, opportunities absolutely need to be increased if we are to experience significant change.