Camille Hardman has been producing documentaries and reality TV series in both her native Australia and Los Angeles. She started in TV in Sydney over 15 years ago making animal and travel documentaries before turning to human interest documentaries and film. Camille has produced and directed documentaries that have been screened on many networks including Discovery, Lifetime, TruTV, National Geographic, ABC and Channel 7, and her documentaries have been accepted into acclaimed international film festivals.

Gary and Larry Lane grew up in Goldsboro NC, and are currently working in Hollywood. They are award-winning documentary filmmakers. Their debut documentary Hollywood to Dollywood was screened in 70 film festivals around the world and won 25 Best Bocumentary awards in total. It also featured 15 original Dolly Parton songs. They also own and operate TwinzZone Productions and cover events and red carpets around the world. 

This week, I sat down with Camille and Gary to discuss their recent documentary Still Working 9 to 5. The film is described as follows: When the #1 comedy, 9 to 5, starring Jane Fonda, Dolly Parton, Dabney Coleman and Lily Tomlin, exploded on the screens in 1980, the laughs hid a serious message about women in the office. Still Working 9 to 5 explores 40 years of inequality.

You can read the full interview below:

Sara: Why did you two decide to pull 9 to 5 out 40 years later? It’s not necessarily a Golden Anniversary or has hit a major milestone, so to speak, so what initially drew you to the project?

Gary: In 2017 Dolly, Lily, and Jane went onto the Emmy Awards and there were instant rumors that a sequel was in the works. They were really funny together and that was the initial talk I had with my brother [Larry]. You know it’s been a movie, a TV show, a song, a musical, and now it’s going to be a sequel. So the initial talks we had was to try to capture everything 9 to 5 had been and do a documentary about all the iterations it has been leading up to the long-awaited sequel. And that’s kind of, you know, where me and my brother were with the fandom, we’ve always been Dolly fans. [We were] Lily Tomlin fans because were twins and she did that movie Big Business with Bette Midler. We always had a connection with Jane as well. We were always big fans and that’s what we wanted to do. We had worked with Camille on another documentary project we had done and I talked to [her] about it. At first, she was like, “I don’t know,” but then she took a day and she really found a lot out about the organization and the movement, now when our fandom met Camille’s feminism and what she saw, it kind of turned into what we have today.

Camille: Yeah, as Gary said, it was very interesting, and as I said earlier I hadn’t seen the film for a very long time. And so I went and rewatched the film and did some research and I found out that the 9 to 5 had come out of a group of secretaries that had gotten together. One of those secretaries, Karen Nussbaum, happened to be good friends with Jane Fonda. I thought, “Oh this is really interesting,” it’s a wonderful angle. To see that root of feminism and where all the characters came from, everything made sense. I found the entire story of the film to be really three-dimensional and interesting. 

Sara: Yeah, when I was doing my research to prepare for this discussion, I was reading some reviews. One of the reviews you featured said that this [film] was a balanced movie between a celebration of a groundbreaking comedy, but also kind of a cautionary tale of things that have to be done and things that haven’t been done yet. How did you find balance? You know I do feel that this could have easily been a very dark, almost scary documentary, really going into some of the horrible things that go on in the workplace. How did you find a balance between how to celebrate a movie and how to be open and transparent with what is still going on?

Camille: I’ll start with this. I think for us, we really wanted to be a homage to the original film. There was an interview where Jane Fonda said “I didn’t want to make a feminist film because then you are already preaching to the converted.” She didn’t say that verbatim, but that’s what she really meant. And so for us, you know, it was very important that we also attract a wider audience like the [original] film did. It had to be entertaining. We wanted to have some humorous elements in it but also be serious. And I think then you get a lot more people watching it. You get people being entertained at the same time, but also saying this is a serious issue. We wanted men to turn up, wanted people to bring their daughters, their sons, and be, as I said, entertained. There is a fine line between education and entertainment and I think we found it well. 

Gary: I’ll add to that. I’ll also say, you know as fans of the film and knowing a lot of people are fans of 9 to 5, I knew–telling Camille and our camera person, Bryan, and all of them [the crew] that we are going to get interviews with all of them. Of course, you don’t know if you’re going to get interviews with all of them, but with connections and people who were in Dolly’s camp—Dolly was the first one we got, and I told Camille we got Dolly. And then I told Camille we got Lily. And Rita Moreno from the TV show. You know Jane was hard, but to me, getting Jane, Dolly, Lily and Dabney [Coleman], the original cast, then we have the documentary that has all the original players from the first film. And working the magic—I don’t know how we created the new duet with Dolly and Kelly Clarkson, but being able to say Dolly Parton let us turn “9 to 5” into a duet, and she and Clarkson sing it exclusively in our end credits—those are all of the fandom things that fans of 9 to 5 will want to come to. You know, I said to Camille, we hide the medicine in the candy. So yeah, you get your cast reunion, you get your new duet, but, hey, you also get 20 minutes of us saying there still got to be change, things need to happen. That’s the medicine in the candy, the call to action. Especially towards the end of the film to just show people that all the things the original film highlighted—equal pay, equal job advancement, sexual harassment, universal childcare—none of those things are really resolved for working women 44 years later.

Camille: Yeah, and I think the other thing is that the film evolved, you know, we didn’t know there was going to be a pandemic. That last section, where we were discovering there were so many women out there being teachers, single moms at home, really feeling that pressure being working moms— having this added pressure, stress, of “How am I going to be a teacher and a provider and look after my child all at once? How am I going to do that?” So that sort of evolved, that’s something that happened around us and we sort of added that in as we went along. 

Gary: Another thing that changed, two years into making the film, was that we found out that the sequel was now off the table. All the women had pulled out of the sequel. Of course, we’re still going, but there’s not that sequel that we were working up to eventually. 

Sara: It definitely sounds like it was very dynamic and in the moment. And I am curious, when you start out to make a documentary, you said you didn’t know what was going to happen—at what point do you decide what direction you want to go? Was it collect as much as possible and go from there, or in the beginning did you know “I’m going to pay an homage and give the information that needs to be given?” What was the process to the end result?

Camille: Things happened as we went along. We had started the project, we knew we were going to discuss where the film came from and the roots of the film from a women’s organization or organization of secretaries. And then we were going to go through the history and, of course, the TV show. Then we were going to, you know, hopefully, be on set and see the development of the sequel. That didn’t happen. So we were like, “What do we do now?” Well one of the through lines that we sort of discovered, that I researched at the beginning, was the ERA. Movements and developments were happening in the ERA. And I thought that that was a really good through line going on at the same time. There were things that were really complementary with what was going on in the movement and the making of 9 to 5. And Gary found Zoe [Nicholson], who gave us all of that wonderful history and knowledge all the way through. That was something that probably came through. Once we found out the sequel wasn’t going to happen, it was like “What else are we going to fill the film with?” Let’s go deeper into where women are now. So that developed. 

Gary: And I think also we were very lucky because, you know, Bruce Gilbert said it is very hard to carry a documentary over 40 years, but we are very lucky that 9 to 5 has had so many iterations. In 1982 when the TV show started, we had Zoe Nicholson fasting on the steps of the capital trying to raise awareness for the ERA, and then in 2009 when the musical on Broadway [came out] we had Lily Leadbetter signing The Fair Pay Act. We were able to find key moments that criss-crossed The 9 to 5 movement, with the working women’s movement, and it helped us flesh out the story and take the audience on the journey of a 40-year span.  

Sara: Yeah it was super interesting, and like I told Camille, I had seen the movie a while back, but I did get to see the stage show. That was my first interaction with this story, and it was nice to see it in the film because that’s what I remember. So obviously the pandemic played out and this was a big thing for you. As you mentioned you brought into the story how women are now balancing whole new levels of responsibility and roles. Do you think the pandemic, in a way, helped or hurt the story you were trying to give out? Because now it is fresh in our minds again—how much we [women] have to go through. At the same time, there is so much noise during the pandemic, that I can see how the documentary could get lost. So really, how did the Pandemic affect you? Possibly good or bad?

Camille: I’ll talk about the making of the film. I made it a lot more complicated because we would have liked to do a few more interviews, but we were unable to do that. We had to finish the film. And there were so many unknowns. I was in Australia working on it remotely. I was in a different time zone, like I am now, and editors were working around the clock. Gary and Larry were in the US. You know, also it took a lot longer and was a lot more expensive, to be honest. Anything that takes longer is more expensive. What it did was, it did highlight, as you say, that women had to take on this extra role to be a teacher and a provider, working around the clock because they had kids at home. If you had four or five kids at home and you had a full-time job, it was just about impossible. The other thing [that] became very relevant was gig work.  Anyone who had gig work or casual work suddenly had no work. There weren’t any benefits, there was nothing. Suddenly people found themselves at home with no jobs and their kids at home—where were they going to get the money?

Gary: And I’ll say, as far as the film, getting into SXSW was big because there had been no film festival for two years—We hear SXSW is going to be the first one to open up in 2022 and that’s where we are going to have our world premiere. Our sales agent is saying, “If I don’t sell you before SXSW, I’ll sell you at SXSW—It’s a done deal.” So what do we do? We put more money in. We get the archival lot. The opening graphics lot. More, more and more to get the film ready. Then we get to SXSW for our world premiere and we start hearing things like “Volatile market; 40% of buyers’ boots are in the ground; everything’s changed; the documentary selling market is gone.” These are things we are hearing and we are in the middle of it. So that was an awakening for us. We still have not sold the film. To put so much into it, so much behind the film—and also we’ve been to film festivals around the world. We’ve won over 10 Best Documentary awards; we got a Critics Choice nomination for Best Historial Doc; we hold a 93% rating on Rotten Tomatoes; we’ve had all positive critics reviews—those things are frustrating to know that we still don’t have the film out on a wide audience. I feel like the film needs to be on a wide audience because it has a very important message behind it. 

Sara: Of course. Let’s get into where you are at now. You mentioned the critics’ reception was great, have you had a chance to speak to, not only critics but general audiences?

Gary: Well we have only been able to run in the film festival circuit. What I do, I run all of the social media accounts—Facebook, Twitter, Instagram—and I get constant feedback. “Please get it out on DVD.” “Please get it out on Blue-Ray.” “We just want to see it.” Our sales agent has gone to the streamers and we actually have the feedback from the steamers: “Love the film.” “Great film! However, it doesn’t fit our demographic. We’re going for—targeting a teen demographic.” “It’s too old.” “It’s not relevant” We heard that from one. It’s just frustrating to know [that] women are not in the constitution. The Equal Rights Amendment was never passed. When me and Camille are standing on stages around the world doing Q&A’s after the film, we ask [audiences] if they knew the equal amendment hasn’t passed, never passed, half [of them] always raise their hands that they didn’t know. Dolly, herself, didn’t know. She said that in her interview. It’s a message that needs to be out there. I talked to Zoe Nicholson, our ERA advocate, and she said that “the way y’all did it..you have so much fandom of 9 to 5–you got Dolly, Lily, Jane—I really thought that this was going to be the tool, as a pop culture thing, that draws a lot eyeballs to our message—the message I’ve been trying to get out for 60 years—I really thought it was going to be the vessel.” I said I don’t give up. The reason we are on the phone [Sara] is because I am getting in contact with a lot of media. I try to get reviews. I try to keep the film alive. 

Camille: I’ll try to add to that: I think the responses have come from really diverse audiences. We’ve had really diverse audiences. It’s been all around the US. We’ve had a lot of mothers who had brought their daughters, and the daughters turned around and said, “Mum I had no idea this is what you went through.” And so it’s started some wonderful dialogue. We had some male audiences come and a lot of the responses we get is: “We had no idea it was going to be so fun. We thought it was going to be a really serious documentary, and you’ve found a really wonderful fine line [again] between making it educational and making it entertaining.” So that’s been really wonderful for us. The other thing is that we have talked to a lot of younger women who said [they] really respond to this. We did hear back from those buyers, as Gary had said, who said women wouldn’t relate to this. But we have found out that a lot of young women do relate to this film. A lot have come to us and said “Thank you so much for this film. I really [connect] with this film—the young women in this film. That has happened to us. It is still happening today and we can’t believe it, so thank you for this—exploring this topic.”

Sara: That’s crazy that streamers say young women won’t connect. I’m not a teenager, but I am in my young twenties, and I was telling Camille that these experiences are really relevant. And I do wish more people could see it.

Gary: I’ll add something there. You know, we can do a lot of comparisons. I can’t think of the name, but there was the Mark Whalberg, Michelle Williams movie. They brought them back to film and they paid her like 10,000 dollars and he got 1.5 million. And then the Greta [Gerwig] and Margot [Robbie] Barbie snubs. There is kind of a Hollywood boys club, and I feel like we have this female-rights documentary [and] we are kind of getting pushed back out of it too. Because anything that has a strong women’s story, I think it gets pushback. I think a lot of it is male-dominated acquisition teams—the streamers. I won’t say the streamer, but there was one guy at this streamer who basically said “I don’t like this, I’m not going to do this.” And our sales agent said, “So you get to decide what millions of people get to see?” Our agent said that the film was good and the little people just needed to get out of the way and let the people see the film. I’ll be honest, I’ve reached out to a lot of people, someone to write a story, or try to write a review about it. I hear back that they don’t believe it hasn’t been bought out. [People say] that when the Dolly duet came out, we were in 100 outlets. It was exclusive for the documentary. Our sales agent said we were going to be the most publicized, talked-about film they could not sell. 

Sara: Wow. That is a little disheartening. I was also thinking about the Barbie snubs and how people exploded over that. And I was thinking about some other strong women stories that people overlooked.

Camille: Well the other film that people loved recently that is getting overlooked is Origin. Everybody is raving about that but it got no love at the Oscars. And I have only heard amazing things about that [film]….It’s a very complicated script I heard. But there are many examples. I digress. 

Sara: Yeah, along those lines, films like Origin—Promising Young Woman, I would consider a pretty strong female film. 

Camille: Oh my god. 

Sara: It has something very clear to say. The Woman King came out one or two years ago, another strong female-led film. 

Gary: I didn’t get a lot of love did it?

Sara: No, nothing came out of it. And so I’m curious if you have other thoughts besides it, most likely—definitely—being a boys club. Why, as a society, do we say that we are woke or progressive, we believe in the female movement, but when we get strong female films—documentaries or narrative films—nothing happens?

Gary: Yeah things have to change. If you have a handful of acquisition teams, at a streamer who gets 40 plus million viewers, that gets to decide yay or nay—say some of those members have Mr. Hart genes in them and don’t care that women are not in the [Constitution]—to me, those things need light shed on them. I said to Camille, I’m not going to be the nice, southern twin anymore. We made this film. We put our heart and soul into this film. We put our life savings into this film, and if me getting behind Barbie snubs and getting behind what happens to women-led projects—I will sing it from the rooftops. Someone is going to write about it. I would get it if we got splat after splat after splat if the movie sucked, but that’s not the case Camille. The truth is, we made a women’s rights film and it’s getting pushback from certain people in Hollywood. I don’t understand it, but I know we are not the only project that is suffering. 

Camille: It’s an interesting question and I need to keep thinking about it. You know, Barbie did very well. I was thinking, why did it do well? Well for one, it’s about a doll and everyone has got the doll. But I think what happened is it all came down to marketing. People were prepared to market it and get behind it. To me that was a very good example of if you do get behind this film, you will have success. But how do you keep, you know, how do you get people, or particularly men, who may not be overly excited by the subject matter of these films to keep marketing them when it’s something they don’t resonate with themselves? And I don’t know the answer to that question. I guess it comes down to a money thing. Barbie is a really good example. Yes, it got snubbed at the Oscars, but it did really well. I mean it’s a billion-dollar film—run by women, created by women, which is a really big step forward. But The Woman King and Promising Young Woman—I think Barbie is still packaged in something palatable. Promising Young Woman was a very difficult subject matter and very difficult for a lot of men to watch. I think because a lot of people saw themselves reflected in that film, whether they were a bystander or a direct participant, they turned away and walked away. I don’t think that is something people want to recognize in themselves. 

Camille cont.: I think that was something 9 to 5 did really well. Because Dabney’s performance was wrapped in humor, you know, men could sit there and watch that. They could laugh and maybe have a little bit of self-reflection. But in Promising Young Woman, there is no—it is very in your face. I don’t think a lot of people can watch that. So how do you get men to watch those films? I don’t know the answer to that. I mean, I told quite a few of my male friends to go and see that film, but they would not have seen that if someone like me hadn’t encouraged them to do so. 

Sara: Yeah, I guess palatability is one thing that needs to be taken into consideration. Do you have any words for directors, such as Emerald Fennell, who maybe don’t want to make palatable films? Or do you have words for directors who want to bring these issues to light, but don’t know how? There is this risk of being too in your face, at least to the group that you want to see the film. 

Camille: Yea that’s right. It’s preaching to the converted. I mean this is what Dakota Johnson was saying the other day. You know there have to be risk-takers. And, unfortunately, a lot of these risk-takers are gone. You know, Fennell just did Saltburn. That was fantastic. It took risks, not the ones we are talking about, but it is a fairly risky film. But someone like Margot Robbie who has the cachet and really the money to take on these types of films, people will listen to her. Someone like her, or other people prepared to take risks. They can fund these films and take some of those risks off of the streamers. 

Gary: I was going to add that the flip side of that coin are filmmakers like me and Camille who self-fund a project and finish a project and have all of this star power and message of women’s equality, the fact that the streamers have changed the game because they have all the power, they now have all of their projects in house. We heard “Oh if your film came out in 2019 you would have had a huge release.” It’s all changed now, and COVID changed that. It is kind of like all the documentary filmmakers, the independent filmmakers, are dying off like the dinosaurs. That’s why Dakota Johnson explained in that article that she has the star power, her parents’ power, and can’t get a film made. It’s all changed, the streamers have all the power now. And they decide what you see and what’s made. They control it all now. 

Camille: And streamers are all run by accountants. They’re not creative people anymore. That’s incredibly unfortunate. But on a positive note, what is happening is we are getting support from a lot of women. A lot of women have seen this film, a lot of women’s organizations, and they cannot believe this film hasn’t sold. And they are coming to us and saying “Can we support you in any way? Can we help support a small theatrical release?” It’s not what we wanted, but we may have to distribute it ourselves. It’s not something we are experts in, but that’s the only sort of option we’ve got at the moment. And so, now we have to spend another year or two going around America and try to show the film to the people that need to see it.

Sara: As you were saying, this really resonated with younger audiences, despite what the Streamer’s feedback was. Do you have a counterargument as to why, not even young adults, but even teenagers who aren’t in the workforce yet, need to see this film? 

Gary: I said on a lot of the media that, if they overturned Roe versus Wade—if they go back 50 more years and take the vote away–young people are getting their rights stripped away in front of their faces. You really need to know what’s going on. We have a film showing what was going on in 1980 and what’s going on in 2024 and it’s not a lot different. You really need to resonate with the message of this film and young people do need to get behind it. There’s an organization, ERA Yes or ERA Now, and it is the only group that has youth activists and they have a chapter in every state. It’s one of the biggest mobilized groups and they are teenagers. Some teenagers are getting off their phones and trying to make a difference. I feel like they could be doing more. You know, we’re going to be gone, and it’s going to be them who continue to have their rights stripped away.

Camille: You know there are daughters who come with their mothers and stand up and ask, “What can we do?” They are worried about what will happen when they go into the workforce. And it’s communication. You need to always communicate with the women around you—at work, with your sisters, with your mother—constantly communicating with your friends. If something is happening to you in the workplace, there is a good chance it’s happening to another woman there as well. And so I think that is a really amazing piece of advice that will constantly resonate. You need to keep that level of communication whether you are young or old. And sexual harassment in the workplace is so pervasive. It’s gotten better, but it is still and thing of power and girls need to feel comfortable talking to their friends or colleagues. That can create change. For us, it was like feeling comfortable talking. It was something we really, really wanted to show in the film. You know, in the generation during 9 to 5, women were in competition. Women didn’t have that level of communication, 

Gary: I was at a Q&A with Zoe a few months ago, when Roe v. Wade was flipped, and she said that you have to understand that it all goes hand in hand. “If the equal rights amendment had passed in 1982 when I did my fast, then women would have been protected in The Constitution and Roe versus Wade could not have been overturned. It all goes hand in hand.” The young generations ask them to pass the torch, but Zoe said, “You can’t have my torch, I’m taking my torch with me, but you can light your torch from mine.” It was very powerful. As a guy, because of this film, I am now a women’s rights advocate. This film was pushed down because of the message behind it. Camille and I could have made a 9 to 5 fluff piece and sold it and been done with it. That’s not what 9 to 5 is about. It’s about a movement, an organization, and women’s empowerment—still a message that 44 years later, today, unfortunately, still needs to be talked about. 

Sara: What can we do now to support the film? People like me? People who are excited about the film. 

Camille: I was going to have a laugh and say, “Write a great article!”

Sara: Don’t worry!

Gary: That would be amazing, but also the Facebook is constantly growing—Instagram, Twitter. I have been really playing up on the “we need a 9 to 5 sequel,” and it’s been well received. I’m really playing up on the fantasy sequel to keep the movie alive. Obviously, stillworking9to5.com gets you to our Facebook and Twitter. The more we show that many people are interested, the more we can show evidence to streamers. 

Camille: Yeah, going onto that same website, signing up for the mailing list, so when we do have a release we can let everybody know. Following Facebook and Instagram—we always put news up. 

Sara: Thank you so much. That was a wonderful discussion! Is there anything else you’d like to add?

Gary: Well I think up until this point we’ve been all sunshine and roses, but today there were a lot of truth bombs. I just feel better to get it out there and let people know that our film has a strong message and has been well received—-for whatever reason it’s not getting out to that wider audience who needs to see it. 

Camille: I agree. That’s all I have to say. 

Sara: Well I really appreciate the honesty. It was not all sunshine and roses, but I wish you all the best. Thank you again for talking with me. 

Gary: Thank you for everything! 

Camille: Thank you. It was fantastic. 

You can read more about the documentary in my recent review here, and you can read more about my thoughts on Streaming Services and female-led films here. 

Follow our interviewees online:

Camille Hardman IMDb

Gary Lane IMDb

Follow our interviewer online:

Sara Ciplickas on Instagram and Twitter

Feature Image Credit to ‘Still Working 9 to 5’ via IMDb