Misan Harriman discusses documentary portrait “Shoot the People,” with director Andy Mundy-Castle

Misan Harriman is speaking out about his role in Andy Mundy-Castle’s documentary portrait “Shoot the People,” following the release of the pair’s prior collaboration context and building toward the film’s wider exhibition. In an interview published by Deadline on July 6, Harriman described working with Mundy-Castle on a project that centers on his own witnessing and imagery, framed through the director’s documentary approach.

The film takes its name from a subject of national historical controversy: what Britons have sometimes called the “farming experiment,” an adoption program in which thousands of Black children from West Africa were placed with white families in England between 1955 and 1995. Deadline’s account says the project traces how many of those children faced widespread abuse and prejudice after being taken from their communities.

Deadline also points to the documentary lineage of Mundy-Castle’s work. The director previously made “White Nanny Black Child” (2023), a film that similarly investigates the legacy of the practice and the consequences for the children involved. In the new conversation about “Shoot the People,” Harriman and Mundy-Castle discuss how that earlier reporting and visual inquiry feeds into the new film’s focus on portraiture and lived experience.

Harriman is described in industry coverage as a photographer and activist whose work has emphasized protest and social rights struggles. In background material connected to his profile for DOC NYC, he is characterized as a Nigerian-born British image-maker whose photography has focused on grassroots protests, including climate-related demonstrations, reflecting a public-facing practice that carries into documentary work.

Industry press around “Shoot the People” also indicates a release push for cinemas in the United Kingdom and the United States during the summer, positioning the film for audiences who typically seek theatrical documentaries rather than festival-only screenings. That kind of distribution can put documentary material into mainstream viewing settings, increasing the likelihood that historical accounts and their contemporary resonance are discussed in public rather than confined to academic or niche circles.

For families and communities with intergenerational ties to the adoption program, the film’s subject matter raises questions about historical record, responsibility, and the visibility of harms that were long discussed in limited venues. In Britain, government and court records concerning historic child welfare cases have often been cited in later decades, and documentaries like Mundy-Castle’s typically function as a bridge between archival documentation and personal narratives.

The next steps for “Shoot the People” are tied to its scheduled cinema rollout and to follow-on conversations that commonly accompany theatrical documentary releases. As Harriman continues to publicize the film, the practical effect is to connect a contested historical chapter to contemporary media audiences through a format that relies on audience attention, viewing conditions, and the credibility of on-screen testimony.

Mundy-Castle’s documentary method, and Harriman’s portrait-centered involvement, place the work at the intersection of visual journalism and film narrative. Deadline’s reporting emphasizes that Harriman is not only a subject but also a working collaborator, turning personal bearing witness into the organizing principle of a film that, according to the account, confronts abuse and prejudice tied to Britain’s adoption practices for decades-long consequences.