No Man of God is the real-life story of FBI agent Bill Hagmaier (Elijah Wood) and his experience interviewing infamous serial killer Ted Bundy (Luke Kirby) over a five-year period before Bundy’s execution in 1989. In 1984 the FBI began a program to “profile” violent serial offenders in an attempt to try and understand their psychology in the hopes that it would give them insights to effectively combat future crimes. Bill Hagmaier was one of the five original full-time profilers.
The film was directed by Amber Sealey, shot by DP Karina Silva and edited by Patrick Nelson Barnes. No Man of God, which was shot on an ARRI Alexa Mini, premiered at this year’s Tribeca Film Festival.
We reached out to LA-based Barnes — whose other editing credits include the Jamie Fox-directed All-Star Weekend, the Jim Cummings film The Wolf of Snow Hollow and the Sundance offering How Does it Start, also directed by Sealey — to find out about his process on the film.
How early did you get involved on No Man of God?
Amber and I started talking several months before production. We’ve worked together many times now and it’s great to be able to brainstorm with her so early in the process. We both trust each other creatively, and it’s helpful for me to get the lay of the land on what’s most important to her, the themes she wants to focus on and if there are any story issues that might be challenging to achieve in production that I want to be aware of. It’s also a chance for her to start throwing out more abstract concepts that aren’t in the script — things she thinks I can achieve in editing because she knows how I work and what my sensibilities and tastes are. That is something that comes with repeatedly collaborating with a director, and I love that.
What direction were you given for the edit? How often was Amber taking a look at the cut?
We were editing during the pandemic, so I was working at my home editing studio. All of my interaction with Amber and the producers was over the phone and Zoom, which was unusual. One of Amber’s biggest imperatives was to infuse the film with this idea of Bundy’s victims’ “voices.” Some of the ways we approached it were specific, like the women who appear throughout the film look like Bundy’s actual victims and break the “fourth wall” by looking at the viewer. It’s as if they are thinking, “Why are you watching this movie about a serial killer?!” But then there was the question of how to expand on that, and that is where the archival material and home movies came in. In editorial we were able to kind of weave this fabric that consisted not only of the everyday lives of the victims, but also the threads of Bill’s memories, his subconscious and the broader culture of the 1980s.
Amber gives me a ton of creative freedom, so one week we might be looking at scenes every day, and for the next week or two after that, I might be working on my own, with the goal of presenting several ideas to her for a scene or concept. As we got into the later stages of editorial, though, we were constantly discussing everything from music choices to individual words of dialogue to typography to how many times Bill’s cheek twitches in the “under the water” scene!
Can you describe the pace of the edit?
To a degree, I think the pace reflects wherever Bill’s head is throughout the film. When he first enters the prison, the pace is more tentative as Bill feels Bundy out. In each subsequent meeting, I played with both rhythm and pacing as Bill tries to endear himself to Bundy and then is challenged by him. Then they experience this kind of melding of the minds, and the rhythm becomes binary in a way; the pace picks up, and then Bill pulls away again when he gets too close. When Bill realizes who he and Bundy truly are, the film, like Bill’s head, becomes almost dreamlike. And, of course, the wild card in all of this is Bundy’s erratic emotional state and manipulative behavior.
Was there a particular scene that was most challenging?
The most challenging scene was probably the “under the water” scene. Without giving too much away, there is a scene where Bundy recounts to Bill how he killed. In addition to shooting Luke performing his role as Bundy, Amber also shot Elijah performing Bundy’s lines, and we used that to construct a kind of “cubist” approach to the scene — so the viewer is simultaneously experiencing Bundy telling the story, while Bill is both listening to and living the story. This is a perfect example of how Amber and I collaborate so well together. She has this brilliant idea of shooting Bill speaking Bundy’s words, and then she looks to me to make it work in a cinematic way within the story. I used a lot of overlapping lines, jump cuts, reverb, sound design and Clarice Jensen’s haunting score to pull it off. I have to give credit to producer Daniel Noah as well. He was really involved in helping us craft these scenes so precisely.
Did you do more than edit on this film?
I designed the opening title sequence.
You said the editing happened during the pandemic. Can you talk more about how that affected the workflow?
Yes, and on top of that we had the raging wildfires a short distance from set. I wasn’t on set but was talking to Amber regularly on the phone — they had to follow all of the COVID rules for airing out the rooms, but then the air outside was filled with smoke.
The biggest ways it affected editorial were not having an assistant editor working in the same location as me and not being able to watch cuts in person with Amber and the producers. My assistant, Patrick Lawrence, would email me updated bins as he finished organizing and syncing, and when the archival material started coming in, he would send that footage to me through Frame.io. We kept a similar folder structure so when it came time for turnovers, he could simply reconnect any offline files.
Director Amber Sealey
Not being able to work with Amber in person didn’t change the workflow that much, but that made it especially important that we focus on the specifics when we talked or when we watched cuts together over Zoom. I did my best to imagine her in the room with me and watch her face for any tells that something might not be registering right.
What system did you use to cut?
Avid Media Composer. I thought it would make it easier to send cuts back and forth with my assistant without issues since everything was being done remotely due to COVID.
Do you use any tools within that system that people might not know about that you use?
At this point all the NLEs have the same capabilities, so it’s just about the editor finding the best way to get what they want. I definitely used some split screening a few times.
How did you manage your time?
Because I was working at home, and because we had such a tight editorial timeline and so much creative experimentation involved with this film, I had to sacrifice a lot of free time to make sure we got the film we wanted. I was happy to do it because so much was riding on it. We all had to put in the extra effort to overcome the production limitations caused by the pandemic.
Can you talk more about working with your assistant?
Patrick Lawrence is an editor in his own right. He’s highly organized, which allowed me to focus on the edit. And I really needed that. With everyone working in different locations and with such a time schedule, there was a greater chance that little details might slip through the cracks.
I am always open to any assistant editor who expresses interest in cutting scenes or looking for feedback, but frankly, with the demands of today’s schedules, that rarely seems to happen, which is unfortunate. I’m looking forward to having an opportunity to do more of that in the future, though.
How do you manage a producer’s expectations with what can really be done?
Very carefully! Seriously though, I love the challenge of incrementally making something better, and I love when producers and directors have high expectations—in fact, I expect it. That means everybody takes what we’re making seriously. Communication and honesty go a long way in making sure everyone is on the same page with what we are working toward. I pride myself on being an editor who tells it like I see it rather than just keeping quiet or avoiding a difficult conversation.
How do you take criticism?
I really look at it as an opportunity to re-examine the film. It takes a lot of forces pushing and pulling in different directions to reach a “synthesis.” It’s simply a necessary part of the process. I try not to take anything personally, and I always ask myself, “Will this note help the audience understand a character more deeply? Or make the narrative drive clearer or more engaging?” If I don’t think it does, then I better have a good reason for my opinion, and I’m never afraid to express that. After all, that’s what I’m hired to do.
