Peter Berger

The following interview was conducted via email with Peter Burger, director of The Tattooist.

The Tattooist

Julien R. Fielding: I’m very interested in Aboriginal and Maori themed films, but since I live in the U.S. not many come this way. So I was pleasantly surprised to see The Tattooist was readily available. Do you think that’s because distributor’s are more likely to take a chance on horror as opposed to a straight drama?
Peter Burger: Certainly. Exemplary films will make it out no matter what, but otherwise your odds are improved with a readily marketable genre.

JRF: Could you provide a bit of background information on yourself?
PB: My full name is Peter Meteherangi Tikao Burger. My tribes are Ngai Tahu from New Zealand’s South Island, and Rangitane from the North. I was born in Wellington, New Zealand’s capital, in 1973 and I was brought up in Wellington’s suburbia.

JRF: I see that you are of Maori and Lithuanian descent. How has your background affected your interests and the types of films you do?
PB: Being Maori is important to my identity, although I did not start learning to speak Maori until I attended junior high school. This part of my identity has both influenced my decisions in my career, and has also created opportunities. It would be fair to say that the work I’ve done has been a part of my exploration of my identity as a New Zealander, and as a Maori.

My Lithuanian side has impacted me very little except for leaving me with a Germanic surname. Like the States, New Zealand is a country of immigrants, and more so than America, in New Zealand most European ethnicities are left behind after a generation or two in favour of a homogenised “white” New Zealand identity. Personally I believe this is a problem, and leaves pakeha (white) New Zealanders with a bit of a national identity crisis.

JRF: I’m really interested in the TV series “Mataku,” on which you worked as a director. Could you talk a bit about that project, your involvement, and how successful it was? Was it, as one person said, a kind of Maori take on Tales from the Crypt? I’d love to see that released here, but I doubt it ever will.
PB: Tales from the Crypt, or perhaps Twighlight Zone in some instances, is a good reference. It was very much an amalgam of that kind of American television series, which themselves descend from literature such as Edgar Allen Poe’s works, and traditional Maori ghost stories. As far as I know, humans of all cultures enjoy ghost stories, and they serve different purposes. Often, and this is usually the case with Maori stories, they are parables, cautionary tales which reinforce customs, belief systems, and taboos. There is also the entertainment value, which shouldn’t be underestimated: Both in traditional, pre-European society, and arguably more so today as the old belief systems carry less weight.

JRF: How did you make the leap from TV series to feature film? And why did you happen to choose “The Tattooist” as your debut? What about the story appealed to you?
PB: I was given the script by the producer, who I’d met while I was in Cannes with my short film a few years earlier. To be honest, one of the major things that appealed was that I was being given the opportunity to make a feature. Horror as a genre has never particularly appealed; although there are some standout classics and these were my references.

Having said that, there were two major elements which appealed to me about the story. The first was the Samoan angle: I was particularly interested in setting a story in such a dynamically changing culture. Traditional pre-European tattooing, Christianity, Westernisation, post-colonial reactionism, the influence of black America, all these elements are vibrantly alive in New Zealand Samoan society, and it’s a very exciting place to set a story. On top of that, some of the visceral descriptions of the ink-attacks in the story elicited such a response in me when I read them, that I looked forward to the challenge of creating that on screen.

JRF: I watched the behind-the-scenes extras for “The Tattooist,” so it looks as if you really involved the Samoan community. What was their initial reaction to the story?
PB: They certainly had their questions and concerns. We met a number of times with a group called the Malofie, a group of Samoan chiefs and orators whose purpose is to keep the more formal elements of Samoan society intact in New Zealand. We figured they would be our toughest critics, and if they were happy, we’d be as safe as we could be.

JRF: What input did they offer?
PB: They were with us right throughout the production process. We had one major contact and advisor, but there was a core group of probably about a dozen or so people who were regularly on set. Their head tattooist was our Samoan tattoo designer, and their spokesman was our main point of contact. They were also extras, as were their networks of family and friends.

JRF: Did you change the script to accommodate reactions?
PB: Yes it did, although largely in the details. The basic premise was unchanged, although this is probably largely due to the fact that the original concept originated from a Samoan writer, and then the pakeha writers who wrote the screenplay did a lot of research as they wrote – so our work with the Malofie was not our first contact with Samoans.

JRF: How does the indigenous population - Maori included - view films made about them? In the U.S. a lot of American Indians complain about misrepresentation by white filmmakers, citing evidence of stereotyping, etc. They also tend to balk whenever ritual is represented. You have Samoan actors in your film and you’re showing something quite sacred - tattooing as a ritual - and I’m wondering how they reacted to that? Do you have backlash over the filming of “sacred” ritual?
PB: There was very little backlash; less even that I expected. Had white people made a similar film about Maori society there would have been a much larger negative reaction, and I believe that is because Maori are a generation or two further down the post-colonial process. There are plenty of well-educated, politically active Maori who are more likely to get stroppy about such things. There are simply fewer Samoans in the same situation. That will change within the next generation.

JRF: How “authentic” is your film and was that important to you?
PB: The only way to avoid a backlash is to be technically correct, and so yes it was very important to me. As I’ve indicated, I was really more interested in making a story in the New Zealand Samoan world than in making a horror film, and I think that shows. If my priority was the horror, the film would no doubt have been scarier and therefore probably more financially successful, but there you go.

JRF: Interestingly, I watched your film and then not four hours later saw a documentary on tattooing - the first part took place in New Zealand. I know a bit about the moko and other types of tattooing, but I was surprised to discover how much your film was “documentary’ like. Any comments on that?
PB: Further to my previous note, I do believe that any originality and power that The Tattooist has does stem from the actual beliefs of the Samoan people. With this in mind, my approach was that the greater the sense of reality of customs that was communicated in the film, the greater the plausibility of our murderous ghost.

JRF: I know you consulted with Samoan tattoo artists. And that you and Jason Behr were made chiefs. Why exactly did they do that?
PB: I believe it was both to acknowledge the work that we were doing in terms of presenting their customs to the world (perhaps this sounds naïve, but that is exactly what they said to us), and also to underline the significance of the work we were doing – to underline to us that we should take our responsibilities seriously.

JRF: I am interested in the “ghost” story aspect of “The Tattooist.” It seemed very similar to Japanese or other Asian horror films in that an angry spirit can take revenge. Do you want to talk a bit about that?
PB: Like Mataku, The Tattooist was created in an environment awash in international influences. I actually relate the story and structure more to American influences, with a ghost that needs to right a wrong before it can be put to rest. Japanese horror films tend to have more of a “shit happens” approach, which can be scarier because there is less logic to the ghost.

JRF: How successful has “The Tattooist” been?
PB: Just getting mainstream distribution in the US is in fact a sign of considerable success for a New Zealand film. Having said that, the financial income has been fair but modest.

JRF: Did you deliberately cast an American actor, hoping to get wider appeal? Behr was recently in Dragon Wars, which interestingly starred white actors in a Korean made film. I’m sure that lent to it getting distribution in the U.S. I myself find this a bit racist on the part of distributers. I hate seeing a white lead in an otherwise all Asian cast (Forbidden Kingdom had this.) But I’ve seen documentaries and talked to Asian filmmakers who say that no one in Hollywood wants an Asian in the lead, because they aren’t marketable.
PB: There is a very strong argument to say that it is indeed racist, but it is commercially driven racism. There is no way we would have US distribution without an Amercian lead actor.

JRF: I’m sure that Maori actors, such as the brilliant Temeura Morrison and Chris Curtis,and Samoan actors like Robbie Magasiva, who is brilliant as well, find that frustrating. They are all more than capable of carrying a film. I guess Dwayne Johnson and his success gives some actors hope. I don’t know if you want to comment on this or not.
PB: If you’ve spent anytime trying to sell a film, you realise how quickly you have to abandon your principles if you want to sell your wares. There is absolutely no consideration for political correctness in the commercial market – simply what will sell.

This is not the same in a government-supported industry such as New Zealand’s film industry, where cultural diversity, and in particular the unique contribution that Maori culture offers New Zealand, is valued. But this is also not without its flaws, because then you have bureaucrats making executive decisions about which stories are more or less valuable to New Zealand society – a necessary part of the process, but one which unavoidably leads to some people feeling unfairly done by.

JRF: What is next for you?
PB: Right now I’m finishing a tele-feature about a man who was imprisoned for a rape he didn’t commit. Heavy stuff, which I am enjoying. I’m also developing a story about my cousin, who undertook a major international trek (can’t say any more about it at this stage sorry). Yet more cultural conflict, but a personal drama in an epic setting this time.

JRF: I’m curious what your interests are/ your influences - cinema or otherwise.
PB: I’ve always been into drama since I was a kid, and for a long time I was heading down the line of being an actor. While at University I changed tack, and combined my interest in photography to decide to train to be a director. I am extremely glad I made that decision, since directing allows me to indulge the geeky/tech side of my personality which acting doesn’t require.

JRF: And finally, since you started in the film industry, how have you seen it change?
PB: Ours is a film industry which is still only very new. With the exception of some strong individual players, New Zealand’s film industry only gathered critical mass a single generation ago. Those directors and producers are still working now. Technically we have matured considerably even since I’ve been in the industry. Things are less cowboy now, more professional. That means they’re more sustainable, but it doesn’t mean the films are likely to be any better, in fact the reverse is true.

We have a dilemma in creating films in New Zealand, which I am still only starting to understand. Due to our small population, the art-house niche in New Zealand is simply too small to sustain the production budget of a professionally made film, so our filmmakers are encouraged to make films that will play in the mainstream theatres, attracting as large an audience as possible. But internationally, our films will always be seen as foreign films, and therefore attract a more “art house” market. Too mainstream a movie will disappoint that market. Too arty a film will mean a small box office in New Zealand. There is a middle ground, and it was found by Whale Rider and Once Were Warriors, but it’s not easy.

Filmography

“The Pretender” (TV Series, 2008)
“Burying Brian” (TV series, 2008)
The Tattooist (2007)
“Rude Awakenings” (TV Series, 2007)
“Maddigan’s Quest” (TV Series, 2006)
“Hard Out” (TV series, 2003)
“Mataku” (TV series, 2002)
Turangawaewae (2002)
“The Strip” (TV series, 2002)