Chris Vallone is an award-winning independent filmmaker, writer, director, and editor with more than 25 years of experience in visual storytelling. Raised on traditional cinema, he puts character, atmosphere, and emotion at the heart of his work, and in recent years he has added generative AI to his process as an extension of the filmmaker’s toolkit rather than a replacement. His WWI short One Man’s Land won Best Narrative Short at the AI Media Festival in Los Angeles.
This Sunday, 15 November 2026, at 8:00 PM Eastern (1:00 AM Monday, 16 November in London), his latest film, ‘Shinel: Voices of the Stolen,’ premieres on YouTube. The film tackles human trafficking, a subject that cannot be ignored. Vallone’s dark psychological thriller about revenge, justice, survival, and the fight against human trafficking. Ahead of its premiere, we sat down with Chris to discuss the project and what audiences can expect.
Chris, thank you for taking the time to speak with Occhi Magazine regarding your latest project, ‘Shinel: Voices of the Stolen’, premiering this Sunday at 8pm EST on YouTube. The film tackles human trafficking, a subject that’s hard to watch and easy to look away from. What drew you to this story?
I’ve always been drawn to stories about people who have been pushed to their breaking point, especially those who have experienced unimaginable hardship and somehow find the strength to fight back. I originally wrote Shinel as a feature screenplay back in 2007. Human trafficking was something I found deeply disturbing, particularly the idea of children being robbed of their innocence and having their entire lives changed by the cruelty of others. But I didn’t want to tell a conventional rescue story. I wanted to explore what happens when someone who survived that kind of darkness grows up and decides she’s no longer going to be a victim. What if the people who spent their lives hunting the helpless suddenly became the hunted? That’s really where Shinel comes from. It’s a dark, fictional story about trauma, survival, and ultimately taking back power.
What did you want to say that you felt hadn’t been said well enough elsewhere?
I think we hear about human trafficking, we see the statistics, and we’re horrified by them. But sometimes those numbers become so overwhelming that we forget there are actual human beings behind every one of them. With Shinel, I wanted to approach the subject from a different angle. Rather than focusing entirely on the suffering, I wanted to explore the aftermath.
What happens to someone who survives something so horrific? How does that experience shape the person they become? And then I wanted to take it a step further, into the territory of a psychological revenge thriller. What if that survivor decided to confront the very people responsible for destroying so many lives? I’m not suggesting revenge is the answer in real life. This is cinema. But I believe storytelling allows us to explore those darker questions and emotions in ways that can stay with an audience long after the film ends.
Where did ‘Shinel’ begin? Was it a person, a news story, a conversation, or an idea you carried around for years before you felt ready to make it? How much of it is rooted in real events, and how did you approach the responsibility of telling those stories
Shinel actually began around 2006–2007, while I was shooting my feature-length action drama, The Agent. One of the actresses in the film was originally from Russia, and during production, we had some fascinating conversations about her experiences and the darker side of life in the Soviet Union during its final years and collapse. She described some truly horrific things about that period, and those conversations stayed with me. They really opened my eyes and became a major inspiration for what would eventually become Shinel. I started imagining a young girl growing up in that environment, having her childhood violently taken away from her, and carrying those experiences into adulthood. What kind of person would she become? How would she cope with that trauma? And what if, instead of running from her past, she eventually decided to confront it?
I wrote the original feature screenplay in 2007, and the story has stayed with me ever since. Although Shinel is fictional, its inspiration came from those real conversations and the troubling history surrounding that era. I never wanted to sensationalize the suffering of real people. I wanted to create a compelling character-driven thriller while keeping the human consequences of violence, exploitation, and lost innocence at the heart of the story. Nearly 20 years later, I finally have the tools to bring that original vision to the screen.
When the credits roll at the premiere, what would you love viewers to be thinking or feeling in the hours afterward?
First and foremost, I want audiences to feel like they’ve experienced a compelling piece of cinema. I want them emotionally invested in Shinel, curious about her past, and wondering where her journey takes her next. I’ve always believed that great filmmaking should make you feel something. Whether it’s tension, sadness, anger, or even a sense of satisfaction, those emotions should stay with you after the credits roll.
But beyond the entertainment, I hope viewers think about the real people whose lives have been devastated by human trafficking. We often hear about the victims, but we don’t always consider the lifelong psychological scars survivors may carry. And since this short is a proof of concept for a feature film, I’d certainly love for audiences to walk away saying, “I want to see what happens next!”
If someone went on to support an anti-trafficking group or start a conversation with a friend, would you count that as a film that did its job?
Absolutely. If Shinel inspires even one person to learn more about human trafficking, support an organization fighting it, or simply have a meaningful conversation about the issue, I would consider that a tremendous success. As filmmakers, we have an opportunity to entertain people while also bringing attention to subjects that deserve more awareness. I don’t believe a film needs to preach to its audience to accomplish that. Sometimes a powerful story can open the door to a conversation far more effectively than simply presenting facts and statistics.
At the end of the day, Shinel is a fictional thriller, but the suffering that inspired it is very real. If audiences walk away entertained, emotionally affected, and perhaps a little more aware of what’s happening in the world, then I believe the film has accomplished something worthwhile.
What first pulled you toward film? Was there a moment when you realised you wanted to tell stories for a living, rather than just watching them?
Believe it or not, it started with Looney Tunes cartoons, Walt Disney’s Fantasia, and eventually films like The Terminator. As a young boy, seeing those creations on screen absolutely fascinated me. I was captivated by the imagination, the storytelling, the visuals, and especially how music and sound could bring everything to life. Fantasia had a particularly strong influence on me. The idea that music itself could inspire an entire visual story was incredible. That philosophy still influences how I make films today.
I often build my scenes around the music, allowing its rhythm, emotion, and intensity to guide the visuals. Then came films like The Terminator, which showed me an entirely different side of filmmaking. The atmosphere, suspense, action, and sheer creativity opened my eyes to what cinema could accomplish. I knew from a very young age that I didn’t just want to watch movies. I needed to make them. That feeling never went away.
You studied fine arts at St. Thomas Aquinas College before your career took off. How has that training shaped the way you think about character, atmosphere, and composition today?
My fine arts education at St. Thomas Aquinas College was incredibly valuable. I studied drawing, painting, photography, and composition, which gave me a strong understanding of visual storytelling long before I stepped behind a movie camera. Those disciplines taught me how lighting, color, perspective, and composition can influence the way an audience feels. I learned that a single image can tell an entire story without a word being spoken.
I’ve always believed in “show, don’t tell.” Sometimes the way a character is framed, the shadows surrounding them, or even the empty space within a shot can communicate far more than dialogue ever could. I still approach filmmaking with the eye of a painter and photographer. Every frame should have purpose, atmosphere, and emotion. Whether I’m working with traditional cameras or today’s AI filmmaking tools, those artistic fundamentals never change. Technology is simply another way of putting that creative vision onto the screen.
Looking back at your early years in the industry, where did things turn out differently from what you expected? What did that gap teach you about yourself?
I have a saying: “Making a film is like going to war.” And after 25 years in this business, I still believe that! When I first started, I underestimated just how difficult it would be to bring a film from concept to completion. You have this incredible vision in your head, but then reality hits. Financing, scheduling, locations, equipment, personalities, weather, and a thousand other things can stand between you and the finished product. You quickly discover that filmmaking isn’t just about creativity.
It’s about problem-solving, leadership, persistence, and adapting when things inevitably go wrong. One of the biggest lessons I learned was not to wait around for someone to give me permission to make a movie. If I believed in a story, I had to find a way to tell it. Those early experiences taught me resilience. They also taught me to appreciate every single person who contributes to a production. Filmmaking is a collaborative effort, and getting everyone across that finish line is an accomplishment in itself. The technology may be changing, but the determination required to tell a great story hasn’t changed one bit.
Who were the people, living or gone, whose work or advice shaped how you direct? Is there a piece of advice you brushed off at the time that you now see was important?
Three filmmakers immediately come to mind: Walt Disney, James Cameron, and Mel Gibson. Disney’s Fantasia had an enormous influence on me growing up. The way music could dictate the visuals, emotion, and pacing of an entire sequence fascinated me. To this day, I often build my films around music, allowing it to guide the storytelling. James Cameron’s The Terminator showed me what could be accomplished through atmosphere, suspense, and sheer determination. It proved that a compelling story and a strong creative vision could overcome limitations.
Then there’s Mel Gibson. Films like Braveheart and Apocalypto are tremendous examples of visceral, emotionally driven filmmaking. His ability to immerse an audience in another time and place, often telling so much through imagery, action, and raw human emotion, is something I greatly admire. If there’s one lesson I’ve come to appreciate more with experience, it’s simplicity. Early on, I sometimes felt the need to explain too much. Over time, I’ve learned to trust the audience. Show, don’t tell. Let the images, performances, and especially the music do the heavy lifting. Sometimes the most powerful moment in a film is when nobody says a word.
One Man’s Land has picked up a great run of awards and selections. Which of those moments meant the most to you personally? Were any of them more exciting for other people than for you?
Winning Best Narrative Short Film at the AI Media Festival in Los Angeles was certainly a highlight for me. After putting so much time and energy into One Man’s Land, having the film recognized for its storytelling was incredibly rewarding. But what has meant even more to me is the audience reaction at these festivals.
I’ve had people approach me after screenings, genuinely excited about what they just watched. Some have compared the experience to Saving Private Ryan set during World War I, which is quite a compliment! What I find particularly gratifying is that people respond to the film emotionally. They’re not simply asking about the technology. They’re talking about the tension, the cinematography, the music, and the characters. As a filmmaker, that’s exactly what I want. I want audiences to forget about how a film was made and become completely immersed in the story.
The awards are wonderful, and I’m grateful for every selection and recognition. But seeing an audience connect with something I created will always mean more to me than any trophy. And I think my family and friends sometimes get even more excited about the awards than I do! I’m usually already thinking about the next film.
How do you measure success on a film, and has that changed over your 25 years in the business? Some projects don’t go the way you hoped. Can you tell us about one that fell short of your own expectations, and what you took from it?
Early in my career, I measured success by completing a film, finding distribution, winning awards, and reaching an audience. Those things still matter, but after 25 years, I’ve come to realize that the greatest measure of success is whether your film connects with people emotionally. Did I make them feel something? Did I transport them into another world? Did the story stay with them after the credits rolled? That’s what matters most to me today. A perfect example of a project that fell short of my expectations was my action-drama feature, The Agent, which I shot over 20 years ago on MiniDV. I had ambitious ideas for that film, but the technology and resources available to me at the time were limited. I was trying to achieve a cinematic vision with equipment that had its limitations, and the finished product didn’t entirely match what I had imagined.
But I wouldn’t trade that experience for anything. Making The Agent taught me an enormous amount about directing, working with actors, managing a production, and solving problems under pressure. It also reinforced something I’ve carried with me throughout my career: never let the limitations of your equipment or budget stop you from telling a story. Interestingly, The Agent was also where the inspiration for Shinel first began. So even a film that didn’t fully meet my expectations ended up planting the seeds for another story nearly 20 years later. Sometimes success isn’t immediately obvious. Sometimes you don’t recognize what a project gave you until many years afterward
You describe AI as an extension of the filmmaker’s toolkit, not a replacement. Can you share a moment when it opened up something you couldn’t have done before? Has there been a moment when it let you down or didn’t live up to what you hoped?
One Man’s Land is probably the perfect example. I’ve always loved historical war films, but creating a World War I battlefield with trenches, explosions, period uniforms, and large-scale action would have required an enormous budget using traditional production methods. AI gave me the opportunity to bring that vision to the screen independently. The same goes for Shinel, a screenplay I wrote nearly 20 years ago that I simply didn’t have the resources to produce at the scale I envisioned. But AI certainly isn’t a magic button.
People sometimes assume you type a few sentences, press generate, and suddenly you have a movie. Nothing could be further from my experience. I’ve spent countless hours trying to get a particular performance, camera movement, or action sequence exactly right. Character consistency, facial expressions, physical interactions, and continuity can still be incredibly frustrating. Sometimes a scene that should be relatively simple becomes the most difficult shot in the entire production. There have been plenty of moments when the technology simply couldn’t deliver what I wanted, and I had to rethink my approach. That’s where traditional filmmaking experience becomes so valuable.
You still need to understand directing, cinematography, editing, pacing, and storytelling. AI doesn’t make those decisions for you. For me, the greatest thing AI has done is remove some of the financial barriers between a filmmaker’s imagination and the screen. It hasn’t replaced my creative process. It’s given me another way to execute it.
Some people in the industry worry that generative AI is a threat to the craft and to working artists. What would you say to a crew member or actor who feels that way? Where do you think they have a point?
I completely understand their concerns. I’ve spent over 25 years working in traditional filmmaking, so I know firsthand how much talent, dedication, and hard work go into a production. Actors, cinematographers, editors, production designers, and crew members all bring something incredibly valuable to the process. And yes, I believe some of those concerns are justified. Technology has always disrupted industries, and AI will undoubtedly change how certain jobs are performed.
We shouldn’t dismiss the people whose livelihoods may be affected. But I also believe we need to look at the opportunities this technology creates. For independent filmmakers like myself, AI is making projects possible that might otherwise never get made. Stories that have been sitting on shelves for decades can finally come to life without requiring millions of dollars. I don’t see AI as the death of filmmaking. I see it as another evolution of the medium, much like the transition from film to digital. What concerns me more is the possibility of losing the human element in storytelling. Technology can generate incredible imagery, but it doesn’t replace a filmmaker’s life experiences, imagination, emotional instincts, or understanding of what makes a story resonate. Ultimately, I believe the future belongs to artists who understand their craft and learn how to use these new tools responsibly, rather than allowing the tools to define their creativity.
You’ve kept the core fundamentals of directing, cinematography, editing, and storytelling in place. Where do you draw the line between using AI to bring your vision to life and letting the technology start shaping the vision itself?
For me, the vision always comes first. AI is simply another tool I use to bring that vision to the screen. I’ve been making films for over 25 years, and my creative process hasn’t fundamentally changed. I still approach a project as a director. I think about the story, characters, camera angles, lighting, performances, editing, and especially the music. In fact, I often build entire sequences around a piece of music before creating a single image. I can hear the emotional highs and lows of a composition and visualize exactly how I want those moments to unfold on screen.
AI can sometimes produce something unexpected that sparks a new idea, and I’m certainly open to those happy accidents. That’s part of any creative process. But there’s a difference between discovering something useful and allowing the technology to make your creative decisions. If an AI-generated shot doesn’t serve the story, I don’t care how visually impressive it is. It doesn’t belong in the film. At the end of the day, I’m the director. The technology works for me, not the other way around.
If an independent filmmaker on a tight budget asked where to start with these tools, what would you tell them to watch out for, and what would you tell them to hold on to?
My first piece of advice would be to learn the fundamentals of filmmaking before becoming obsessed with the technology. Study cinematography, editing, lighting, composition, and storytelling. Watch great films and understand why certain scenes work emotionally. Learn how music influences pacing and how a simple camera movement can completely change the feeling of a scene. The biggest mistake I see people making with AI is focusing entirely on generating impressive images without thinking about the story they’re trying to tell. Beautiful visuals mean very little if there’s no emotional connection.
I’d also tell filmmakers to start small. Make a two-minute short film rather than attempting a feature right out of the gate. Learn the strengths and limitations of the tools, experiment, make mistakes, and develop a workflow that works for you. And watch your budget! AI filmmaking can become surprisingly expensive when you’re generating the same shot over and over, trying to get it just right. Planning and preparation are just as important today as they were on a traditional film set. But above everything else, hold on to your imagination and your individuality. Don’t chase whatever the latest AI trend happens to be. Develop your own voice as a filmmaker. Technology will continue to evolve, but great storytelling will always be the foundation of great cinema.
We wish you the very best with ‘Shinel: Voices of the Stolen’. We’re looking forward to Sunday’s premiere. Where can our audiences find out more about you and the film?
Thank you so much! I really appreciate Occhi Magazine taking the time to talk with me about Shinel and my filmmaking journey. Shinel: Voices of the Stolen will have its world premiere on YouTube this Sunday, November 15, at 8 PM Eastern. I encourage everyone to tune in, experience the film, and let me know what they think! This short is also a proof of concept for a feature-length film, so I’m excited to see where the story goes from here. You can watch the premiere here: https://youtu.be/HMGeeL5zlBU. You can also follow my filmmaking projects through Vallone Works and visit my FilmFreeway profile to explore my other films, including One Man’s Land. https://filmfreeway.com/ValloneWorks. And to everyone who watches Shinel, thank you for supporting independent filmmaking. I hope the story stays with you long after the credits roll!
Watch the movie on YouTube or here this Sunday
This is an Occhi Featured advertorial in association with Vallone Works
About Author
