纪录片自媒体解说素材-新闻动态参考-为什么“市长”导演杰西·莫斯（Jesse Moss/Why ‘Mayor Pete’ Director Jesse Moss Relied So Heavily on Chasten Buttigieg’s Input
https://cdn.6867.top:6867/A1A/hddoc/news/2022/07/0503/4716j31u2wc2sum.jpg为什么“市长”导演杰西·莫斯（Jesse Moss
Why ‘Mayor Pete’ Director Jesse Moss Relied So Heavily on Chasten Buttigieg’s Input
2019年1月，来自印第安纳州南本德的年轻男同性恋市长皮特·巴特吉格（Pete Buttigieg）宣布，他正在探索美国总统的出价。制片公司故事集团的制片人丹·科根（Dan Cogan）和乔恩·巴丁（Jon Bardin）立即引起注意，并联系了Buttigieg，以记录他的竞选旅程。中西部市长最终同意拍摄电影，这促使科根和巴丁与纪录片制片人杰西·莫斯（Jesse Moss）联系，以指导该项目。但是当时正在为德克萨斯青少年举行的模拟政府会议的“男孩州”的莫斯拒绝了这一提议。然后，他看到了Buttigieg 2019年3月的CNN市政厅，并决定报道Buttigieg的2020年民主党总统候选人。结果是亚马逊制片厂的“市长皮特”。这部96分钟的纪录片在竞选步道上捕捉了Buttigieg，在印第安纳州的家中，他的丈夫Chasten Buttigieg.Moss与Variety谈到了制作“市长Pete”，这是Rel11月12日在Amazon Prime视频中放松身心。纪录片与您与Buttigieg的丈夫Chasten交谈，讨论主题，以在与当时的市长采访中讨论。我从未见过您在过去的纪录片中出现在相机上。你为什么决定把自己放在这部电影中？我不舒服在镜头前，我觉得目前有点像是有点像用板岩或化妆或化妆（椅子）或随着镜头的轰动。因此，我一直在保护这一点，但是我在那个场景中喜欢的是，贞操表达了电影的叙述至关重要的问题，这就是这个真实性的问题：皮特能够在竞选总统时成为他的真实自我Chasten在整个拍摄过程中对面试问题有帮助吗？可能是生产的两三个月，我正准备对Pete进行第一次（坐下）采访。我们和Chasten一起在南本德的皮特家里，我只是决定提出伊特·贾斯汀（Ite Chasten）成为面试过程的一部分，我从未做过。我从本质上邀请他在我们面前采访皮特，因为皮特习惯于与新闻界交谈，他会和我一起转移到这种新闻模式，所以我想：'也许如果查斯顿问一些问题，我们会得到一些东西否则，我们做了。这对我来说很有趣，所以我想，我也将花一些时间与Chasten在一起。就像是两个撇子。就像一个爱情故事一样。查斯顿非常开放，而皮特则受到更加守卫。如果没有Chasten，会有一部电影吗？不，我不这么认为。我遇到了皮特（Pete），我们的第一次约会非常尴尬，我想，“哦，伙计”。他是失败者，但他不是传统上很棒的纪录片。然后我遇到了查斯顿，他与皮特完全不同。他在情感上表现出色，非常有趣，显然，他与皮特有着深厚的联系。我拍摄的第一个场景之一是皮特给SP关于在南本德长大的封闭感是什么样的。查斯顿（Chasten）正在和他谈论这件事，他质疑（演讲）的个人。他们让我拍摄那个谈话。没有其他人在房间里，我想，‘哦，哇。这确实是亲密的。’这是这对同性恋夫妇谈判有关其身份的这些个人和政治问题。那为我解锁了。如果没有别的，这部电影（电影将是）婚姻的肖像和一种老式的恋爱关系，但也确实是新的。为什么您最初拒绝了这个项目？一部分是我在编辑中的一部分男孩的状态”，并在政治和竞选叙述中掌握了我的眼球，所以我认为我没有带宽。还涵盖了真正的政治而不是假装政治，这很难，因为一切都是如此的舞台管理，而且没有访问权限。我不想那样做。但是后来我看了皮特（Pete）（2019）市政厅，看到他的礼物正在展出。似乎也有ACC向他埃斯。因此，我只是想也许我们可以进入并获得一些有趣的东西。因此，访问是启发您制作电影的原因？吸引我的主要思想之一是美国政治中合理话语的潜力，以及您是否可以将人们聚集在一起，而不是将他们作为政治战略分开。他似乎是一个可以在美国政治生活中削减这些尖锐界限的人。我以为也许我想继续探索这个想法。让您感到惊讶的是，他确实让您进来了吗？我没想到他能够让我进来。随着他在这次竞选中面对和处理的一切，以及他必须以不同方式回答和满足的所有人，他将拥有这个项目的带宽，我认为我真的希望这会更加困难。他对我们的过程非常耐心，开放和chast。我们希望我们的政客受到极大的保护。皮特受到保护，我认为E是他需要保护的一部分。但是皮特没有在镜头上玩，我从来没有觉得。我觉得这是一种根本的透明度。就像“男孩州”一样，这是一部竞选电影，内置，中间和终点。内置的故事情节是导演的浮雕吗？您会认为它更容易编辑，但是我们迷路了。竞选叙述很有用：您赢了，或者输了 - 从来没有抽奖。这很有帮助，但也可能是一个陷阱，因为在竞选叙事中，您非常专注于政治。我们最终找到了一个应该成为的故事，这是在恋爱关系中。因此，许多竞选叙述很重要，而且推动了故事，因此被推迟了一点，其中一些被带走了。我们削减了一年，因为我们只需要参加2020年大选的观点，看看重要的事情。
In January 2019, Pete Buttigieg, a young, gay mayor from South Bend, Indiana, announced that he was exploring a bid for president of the United States. Producers Dan Cogan and Jon Bardin of the production company Story Syndicate immediately took notice and contacted Buttigieg about possibly documenting his campaign journey. The midwestern mayor eventually agreed to be filmed, which prompted Cogan and Bardin to contact documentary filmmaker Jesse Moss about directing the project. But Moss, who at the time was working on “Boys State,” about a mock-government conference for Texas teens, turned down the offer. Then he saw Buttigieg’s March 2019 town hall for CNN and decided to cover Buttigieg’s 2020 Democratic presidential candidate. The result is Amazon Studios’ “Mayor Pete.” The 96-minute documentary captures Buttigieg on the campaign trail and at home in Indiana with his husband, Chasten Buttigieg.
Moss spoke to Variety about making “Mayor Pete,” which is being released worldwide on Amazon Prime Video Nov. 12.
The documentary opens with you speaking to Buttigieg’s husband Chasten about topics to discuss in an interview with the then-Mayor. I’ve never seen you appear on-camera in your past docus. Why did you decide to put yourself in this film?
I'm not comfortable in front of the camera and I feel like it’s like a bit of a trope at the moment to open a documentary with the slate or at the makeup (chair) or with the boom in the shot. So, I was guarding against that, but what I loved in that scene is that Chasten articulates the question that is central to the narrative of the film, which is this question of authenticity: Was Pete able to be his authentic self while running for President?
Was Chasten helpful with interview questions throughout filming?
It was maybe two or three months into production, and I was getting ready to do the first (sit-down) interview with Pete. We were at Pete's house in South Bend with Chasten, and I just decided to invite Chasten to be part of the interview process, which I've never done before. I essentially invited him to interview Pete in front of us because Pete was so used to talking to the press and he would shift into this press mode with me, so I thought, ‘Well maybe if Chasten asks some questions, we'll get something else,’ which we did. That was interesting to me and so I thought, I'm going to spend some time with Chasten, too. It was like a two-hander. It was like a love story.
Chasten is very open while Pete is much more guarded. Would there have been a film without Chasten?
No. I don't think so. I met Pete and we had a very awkward sort of first date, and I thought, ‘Oh man.’ He’s the underdog but he's not a traditionally great documentary subject.’ He is very controlled. Then I met Chasten and he's totally different from Pete. He’s emotionally demonstrative and really funny and he's got this deep connection with Pete, obviously. One of the first scenes I shot was after Pete gives a speech about what it was like to be closeted growing up in South Bend. Chasten is talking to him about it and he questions how personal (the speech) was. They let me film that conversation. No one else was in the room and I thought, ‘Oh wow. This is really intimate.’ Here is this gay couple negotiating these personal and political questions about their identities. That unlocked something for me. If nothing else, this (film would be) a portrait of a marriage and a relationship that's kind of old fashioned, but also really new.
Why did you initially turn down this project?
Part of it was that I was in the edit with “Boys State” and up to my eyeballs in politics and the campaign narrative, so I didn’t think I had the bandwidth. Also covering real politics and not pretend politics, is hard because everything's so stage managed and there's no access. I didn’t want to do that. But then I watched Pete's (2019) Town Hall and I saw his gifts on display. Also there seemed to be access to him. So, I just thought maybe we can get in and get something interesting.
So the access is what inspired you to make the film?
One of the main ideas that drew me in was the potential of reasonable discourse in American politics, and whether you can bring people together, rather than drive them apart as a political strategy. He seemed to be someone who could cut across these sharp lines in American political life. I thought maybe I wanted to continue exploring this idea.
Did it surprise you that he did let you in?
I didn’t expect that he would have the ability to let me in. With all that he was confronting and dealing with in this campaign, and all the people that he had to answer to and satisfy in different ways, that he would have the bandwidth for this project, and I think that I really expected that to be much more difficult. He was pretty patient with our process, and open, and Chasten, too. We expect our politicians to be extremely guarded. Pete is guarded and I think there are parts of himself that he needs to protect. But Pete wasn’t playing to the camera, I never felt that. I felt this was a radical transparency.
Like “Boys State,” this is a campaign film with a built in beginning, middle and end. Is that built-in storyline a relief as a director?
You would think it would be easier to edit, but we got so lost. Campaign narratives are useful: you win, or you lose -- there is never a draw. That is helpful but it can also be a trap because in a campaign narrative you get so focused on the politics. We eventually located more of a story where it deserved to be, which is in the relationship. So, a lot of the campaign narrative, which is important and drives the story, got pushed a little further back and some of it got taken away. We cut for a year because we just needed the perspective of getting through the 2020 election, to see what mattered.
本文资料/文案来自网络，如有侵权，请联系我们删除。
感谢分享，下载收藏了。最喜欢高清纪录片了。
页:
[1]