Meet Wiseman, 96, America’s quiet filmmaking legend

Louis Chilton, The Independent

When we talk about the Great American Filmmakers, there are some names that simply demand to be mentioned. Names like Martin Scorsese, Stanley Kubrick, or David Lynch: those artists whose coruscating command over the medium has made them globally, lastingly famous. And then there are names like Frederick Wiseman. It's no mystery why the prolific 96-year-old filmmaker has never had even a morsel of the mainstream recognition afforded to his peers, though many of those who have watched his work agree that his place in the canon is undeniable. For one thing, he almost exclusively makes documentaries, a mode of filmmaking that's hardly packing out the multiplexes. Even within the world of documentaries, though, he remains a more obscure figure than, say, Ken Burns, Michael Moore, or even Asif Kapadia.

Partly this is down to the work itself: his films are subtle, intricate works, which demand deep engagement to really unpick. They are often long, sometimes as long as four or six hours. Many are named bluntly for their subject matter, with titles such as Hospital, Racetrack, Multi-Handicapped, Domestic Violence or State Legislature; said subject matter is also usually weighty, and (on the surface, at least) forebodingly sombre. Mostly, however, Wiseman is underappreciated in the UK simply because his films have been so very hard to see — until now. In the US, Wiseman has for decades self-distributed his work via his company Zipporah Film, with his filmography also available on the free-to-use American library streaming service Kanopy. Now, for the first time, a significant part of Wiseman's brilliant, essential oeuvre is available to stream in the UK, via a new collection on the BFI Player. Nine of the director's films are included, while five films are also being released in a blu-ray boxset.

The first of these, Wiseman's 1967 debut Titicut Follies, is also his most discussed project. Filmed in what was then called Bridgewater State Hospital for the Criminally Insane, Follies is a damning, unflinching look at the Massachusetts facility's (mis)treatment of its inmates — a candid, harrowing and in flashes grimly funny peek behind the curtain of the sort of unevolved psychiatric institution that inspired Ken Kesey's One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest just a few years prior. (When Cuckoo's Nest was adapted into a film in the mid-Seventies, Follies was repeatedly screened for the cast in preparation.) The documentary drew complaints from Bridgewater and the Massachusetts government — ostensibly over the patients' inability to consent to being filmed, but argued by Wiseman and others to be politically motivated — that led to the film being banned for over two decades.

Many of the hallmarks of Wiseman's style were visible here from the get-go: there is a complete absence of captions, voiceovers, talking-head interviews or explanatory context. His films simply drop you in a location and leave you to figure out what you're seeing, and why you're seeing it. His messages are conveyed through editing and framing, both precise and inventive from the very first film. Wiseman has consistently disputed the idea that he is simply presenting the world as it appears: there is always, of course, some degree of subjectivity in the filming and assembling of any documentary. But as much as any documentary can, a Wiseman film feels almost impossibly fly-on-the-wall, as if you are witnessing the real world first hand.

Titicut Follies also explored many of the themes that Wiseman would return to again and again, throughout his 46-film career: institutions and the way people interface with them; care of the unwell; violence, in all its forms; authority and the abuse thereof. If there is some ethical doubt over the inmates' ability to consent to the documentary — permission was granted for many by the hospital superintendent, acting as their legal guardian — then there was also undoubtedly a benefit in exposing their terrible experiences to the world.

It's the sort of quandary that surfaces a few times watching Wiseman's films, notably in 1969's Law and Order, which followed members of the Kansas City Police Department. In one scene, officers violently place a woman in a chokehold, rendering her unable to breathe, and then deny doing so just a minute later. Wiseman's camera captures it all, without intervention. If something is jarring about this passive spectatorship, then it's a restraint that proved in many ways justified: the film has become a lasting document of the brutality endemic within the American police.

Shortly after Law and Order's release, Wiseman denied that the film was anti-cop, stating that he had realised while filming that his negative stereotypes of the police were "far from the truth". Watch the film, and it's hard to believe this wasn't a complete lie. Even outside of the violence, Law and Order paints a picture of the police as routinely antagonistic, inefficient and abjectly uninterested in actually helping its citizenry.

Not all of Wiseman's films are as eviscerating of their subjects, though some are: 1974's Primate is a sickening look at scientific study on animals, and Juvenile Court (1973) is a scathing look at the juvenile court system. Others, such as High School (1968) and Public Housing (1997), are critical but nuanced looks at particular institutions, and the way that those institutions intersect with wider systems and ideologies. The seeming inscrutability of Wiseman's style leaves much of his work open to interpretation: you are presented with footage, and not told how to necessarily feel about it.