THE FOLLIES OF DOCUMENTARY FILMMAKING - PART 2Frederick Wiseman's 20-Year Fight
Please, speculate away.
Well, I got started 40 years ago. The first movie I made was in 1966. It was only about 1958 when the technology that allowed you to shoot handheld sync-sound movies was developed. So when I got started, there weren’t that many films where people were using that technique. And because the technique was new, there were many different aspects of contemporary life that weren’t explored with it yet. There still are today.
But early on, after 1958, people who were making sync documentaries were mostly following people, either politicians or criminals or both. The idea I had was to make the place the star rather than one person. So the film is about the people at the place.
What do you say to someone before you start rolling film on them?
I’m pretty straightforward. Ethically, that’s the only way to be, but it’s also the best thing to do tactically. I don’t want to put myself in a position where after a film is made, someone can say, “You lied to me about what you were going to do.” So, in the beginning, I say some version of this: “I’m going to make a documentary film. Nothing in the film will be staged. I want to be around for four to eight weeks. During that time, 80 to 110 hours of film will be shot. I don’t know what the themes of the film will be until I edit it. All I am doing now is collecting material. If anybody doesn’t want to be photographed, all they have to do is indicate that and there will be no debate about it. I discover the film in the course of the editing. The final film will be shown on PBS and distributed in different formats.”
It must be hard to do that in the midst of some of the chaotic scenes you’re shooting.
Often it’s not possible to ask permission before the sequence is shot. You can’t say, “Hey, doc, wait a second before you fix that man’s broken leg. I want to tell you what I’m doing.” I shoot till it’s over and then I say, if the people don’t already know, what I just said to you. I ask if it’s all right to use the material, and I tape record my explanation and their response. In my experience, it’s extremely rare that anybody ever says no.
Why do you think that is?
Again, I would only be able to speculate. But I think that people are pleased that you’re interested in them and that their picture is being taken and their voice is being recorded. You can’t underestimate vanity as a reason.
|
|
|
Still from Titicut Follies.
|
Even when their activities are unsavory?
That’s a complicated question. I think most of us feel that what we do is OK. We don’t necessarily see what we do in the same way that somebody else does. That’s often the case. If we thought we were being cruel or hypocritical or sadistic or whatever, presumably we wouldn’t do it. All of us are unconscious of the impact or the effect or the ambiguity of what we’re saying and doing.
Do you feel like you’ve gotten a lot of insight into human psychology and human nature while making your films?
I wouldn’t reduce it to lessons, but anybodynot just a documentary filmmakerwhose experience brings them in contact with a lot of people learns a lot about human nature. Or maybe they just deceive themselves into thinking they’ve learned a lot about human nature.
What do you do when somebody starts getting too performative or unnatural when you’re shooting them?
If I actually think they’re performing for me, I stop.
You just walk away?
Yes. It happens sufficiently rarely as to not be a problem. Again, that’s something that’s rooted in nonfilm experience. As a journalist, if you think someone is bullshitting you, you make some adjustment to that in your reaction to whoever you’re talking to.
The presence of a filmmaker is unusual, but not as unusual as the presence of an interviewer or someone who’s intervening in the situation. That’s more artificial. I think it’s true that the events you see in my movies would have taken place if the movie had not been made. That’s not true of an interview movie or a print interview. Those things are done specifically for a particular event.
Do you never feel the urge to ask questions?
Well, I sometimes do, but I don’t do itat least not on film. In order to try and inform myself about what’s going on in a place, I’ll often ask questions, but not about a specific event. I might want to know when the weekly staff meeting is or who sets the agenda, who are the people at the place who are thought to exercise the most power. I spend a lot of time on those sorts of questions.
INTERVIEWED BY JESSE PEARSON
TO BE CONTINUED:
THE FOLLIES OF DOCUMENTARY FILMMAKING | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
See all articles by this contributor Anonymous, on Oct 8, 2008 wrote: Is this the whole interview?
Does anyone know how Wiseman can get people so used to the camera in 4 to 6 weeks that they forget its there and do what they would normally do. I’m talking in relation to Titcut follies and scenes like the ’force feeding’ incident. If somebody knows or has a source that could supply me with an anwswer, could you please post it up here. |  | |
| |