
“Forgetting the Camera Was Rolling, It Hit Me”: DPs Neema Sadeghi & Nicholas Bupp on Serious People

In Serious People, a music video director hires a doppelganger to take his place at work after he learns that his wife is pregnant. The film, co-directed by Pasqual Gutierrez and Ben Mullinkosson, is inspired by Gutierrez’s own expectant fatherhood and is a 2025 Sundance Film Festival NEXT selection.
Neema Sadeghi (Noel Miller: Stop Crying) and Nicholas Bupp (Aporia, Salam) served as co-cinematographers. Below, they talk about working without a crew and contrasting a calm visual style with a mounting sense of narrative tension.
See all responses to our annual Sundance cinematographer interviews here.
Filmmaker: How and why did you wind up being the cinematographer of your film? What were the factors and attributes that led to your being hired for this job?
Sadeghi: I truly think the boys hit me up for this because they knew I’d be down for anything they were going to ask me to do. As long-time fans of these two geniuses, they could’ve said anything and I would’ve said yes.
Bupp: I had known Pasqual, one of the directors on the film, for numerous years. We both cut our teeth on various commercials and music video projects throughout the years. Pasqual and I were shooting a commercial project for Expedia and through that project he started telling me about Serious People. He said he wanted to tell a story about his way of grappling with the work/life balance of the film industry while simultaneously supporting his wife and family through their upcoming pregnancy. It was a theme that hit close to the heart from me. As a filmmaker, this topic is a constant battle for me and one that is never in balance. Initially I think Pasqual was afraid to ask for help because the subject was so personal, and he’d be asking for favors from friends. I told him not to hold back and that I wanted to hear more. He said they wanted to keep the film intimate and create a collaborative space to explore themes of identity. I immediately said I was in and asked when we start shooting.
I think one of the main factors that lead me to being hired for the job is that I own an Alexa 35mm camera package (haha). Obviously, this wasn’t the only factor, but it certainly helped. We had very little prep, and the project was shot inconsistently and in the smallest of footprints over the course of four weeks. Having access to a camera at the drop of a hat was nice to have.
In all seriousness though, my long relationship with Pasqual led me to being hired. We both have a bit of shorthand when it comes to aesthetics because of our collaborations in the past. Also, working with Ben. the co-director, was a first for me, but I had known his other documentary/commercial work, and we had been in the same circles for a while. He was so supportive and open during the whole process. I learned a lot from both of them about being open to changes, letting things evolve and ultimately reacting to them throughout each shoot day.
Overall, I was very eager to jump onboard and explore the themes that this film touches upon, mainly because I think I’m feeling much of those same emotions within my own life as a filmmaker currently. Your sense of fulfillment, life balance, and loss of relevance are all things that I’m still processing daily. I started to get excited about how these themes could be explored visually. Ultimately, Pasqual was trusting enough to offer it up to me…and off we went.
Filmmaker: What were your artistic goals on this film, and how did you realize them? How did you want your cinematography to enhance the film’s storytelling and treatment of its characters?
Sadeghi: From the start, this project was experimental, so I had little idea of what we’d be shooting each day and had to trust the process and Ben and Pasqual’s vision. I remember the day we filmed Pasqual using a baby doppler on Christine’s belly. At first, it felt like a small moment, but as I sat watching, forgetting the camera was rolling, it hit me—this was real. Hearing the baby’s heartbeat wasn’t acting or sound design; it was life.
That moment changed everything for me. I realized we were creating something truly special. I went home emotional and inspired, and I texted Pasqual: “We are making something special.” From that point on, everything became clear—the goal was to avoid distracting from the moment with camera movement or shifting focus, instead allowing the scenes to unfold in real time. Finding our frame and leaving it, no matter what happens.
Bupp: I think the artistic process, for Neema and me, was ever evolving as we started shooting. We talked about flexibility a lot, stripping things down their simplest form, and allowing room to adapt as we saw something on the shooting day. Within that, Neema and I wanted to create a sort of stillness and observational style throughout the film. Give the actors space, not crowd the set with lights. We tried not to overcomplicate our approach to a scene. The scope of the film was extremely small, but I think what helped us the most was the gift of time. We didn’t pack our schedule too tightly, which allowed us to take a step back and discuss things as they were happening without feeling forced to move on quickly. Out of that we create a “less is more” mantra that had a few simple rules. One of those being to find the frame that conveys the emotion of scene best and commit to it. I think we achieved that quite well. It’s subtle but direct. It creates a subconscious feeling for me when I watch the film, a false sense of calmness as I’m watching the characters in the film spiral out of control.
I think our main goal was to stay out of the way during shooting when it came to our cinematic approach. We want to keep a low footprint and allow the characters to evolve on screen. Pasqual, the main character in the film, is navigating a time of great change and uncertainty as his life with a new baby is on the way. I think we wanted the visuals to create a “false” sense of calm while the anxiety of his character grows more unstable and ultimately reaches a breaking point. We see Pasqual throughout the film making more and more erratic and selfish decisions adversely effecting those closest to him. With the photography, I think we wanted to create a stillness which in turn creates tension and even awkwardness at times. Through thi,s we are forced to experience things as an audience in a very observational way as Pasqual chooses his path.
Filmmaker: Were there any specific influences on your cinematography, whether they be other films, or visual art, of photography, or something else?
Bupp: I think our biggest influence was laying out some simple rules before we started shooting each day. Me, Ben and Pasqual would show up early to set most days, go over the scenes we had that day, and chat about how our rules would influence the photography. Some of those rules were as follows: keep it simple; less is more; [find] the best angle visually that can tell the whole scene without cutting; trust your instincts; don’t cut when you think you’ve got it….keep rolling a bit more.
I think these guidelines acted as our influences within themselves to create the particular style within this film.
Filmmaker: What were the biggest challenges posed by production to those goals?
Sadeghi: At times, the lack of crew made things challenging. For instance, I had to pull focus on a four-minute shot of Christine and Pasqual walking up a hill toward the camera on a 300mm lens. I hadn’t done anything like that in years, so it was both a fun and humbling challenge to tackle on my own.
Bupp: I think for us the biggest challenge was the small scale of the project. Most days it was just the directors, DP and a sound person as the main shooting crew. Learning how to work within those restrictions was challenging, but ultimately fun and freeing in a way. I definitely learned that I’m not a focus puller by any means!
Filmmaker: What camera did you shoot on? Why did you choose the camera that you did? What lenses did you use?
Sadeghi: We used nearly every camera and lens imaginable. Due to the unconventional schedule of this project, we often had to work with whatever equipment was available. While we aimed to stick to the same family, like Zeiss Super Speeds or lenses with a similar texture, there were times we had to deviate. Thankfully, Old Fast Glass, a world-class rental house in Los Angeles, made it possible to grab lenses—sometimes just hours before shooting.
Bupp: We shot on the Alexa LF and Alexa 35 cameras for the shoot. We choose these formats out of necessity and functionality. In terms of function, they are great in low-light and dynamic range and since the film was largely natural light, we felt that the Alexas would perform the best in those scenarios. As far as necessity goes, it’s what we had access to most freely as the shoot wasn’t consecutive days and we were working off of in-kind donations for equipment rentals.
So many different kinds of lenses were used as we were asking for favors on each shoot day, a large portion of them being Super Speeds and B Speeds. Full list is included below [at the end of the interview].
Filmmaker: Describe your approach to lighting.
Sadeghi: This question makes me laugh because the film used almost no lighting throughout the process. As a cinematographer, whose role is to craft the lighting for a scene, this was initially a tough pill to swallow. However, since the film was designed to feel more like a documentary, we chose to rely on available light and simple tools to shape what was naturally present in the space.
Bupp: Lighting was minimal if we played any lights at all. Our scale on this film was so small that a majority of the shoot didn’t have any grip or electric crew. We stayed more minimalistic in our style, and I think in a sense this approach gave us freedom to actually feel the spaces photographically through using wide angle lenses. We tried to keep the space clear of lighting equipment by design so the actors could explore the environment.
Neema and I looked at lighting more in terms of strategic camera position in relationship to the light within a space. Often, we chose to look in a specific direction based on the windows, overhead lighting, or practical lights within a location. We often would choose camera angles in relationship to the contrast and shape that the space was giving us naturally. I think a bigger part of this was being subtractive in our lighting style by taking away light rather than adding to it. Most of the time we would literally close a blind or shut off a practical in the space to give it the mood we felt was right.
Filmmaker: What was the most difficult scene to realize and why? And how did you do it?
Bupp: The most difficult scene to realize for me was the Drake music video scene. We were pulling together resource/favors from all different places for our camera and lighting on that specific shooting day. We wanted multiple cameras as well to be able to capture things in the moment and be more “fly on the wall.” I think I was most nervous about capturing the real chaos and anxiety of a music video shoot because so much of our story hinged on realism. Having multiple cameras for this scene definitely was an asset for us. It really opened up the space for the actors to really explore ideas naturally without having to redo the scene multiple times. In the end, I think everything worked out. The set felt real, and there’s a real tension in this scene built through the editing style and our camera angles. It’s one of my favorite moments in the film.
Filmmaker: Finally, describe the finishing of the film. How much of your look was “baked in” versus realized in the DI?
Bupp: Because a lot of the film was shot in practical locations and with a minimalistic approach to lighting, we did do bit of treatment in the DI. For us we were looking to strike a balance between the naturalism in our shooting style while adding subtle shape, color and contrast that enhanced the image slightly. Mikey Rossiter, colorist at Rare Medium, did a wonderful job of grounding the film in the naturalism we captured in camera while pushing it towards a more filmic falloff in the highlights and color.
TECH BOX
Film Title: Serious People
Camera: Alexa 35 & Alexa LF
Lenses: Zeiss Super Speeds, Zeiss B-Speeds, Zero Optik Nikon, Minolta Rokkor, Angenieux 28-70, Canon FD 50-300 T4.9, Laowa 12mm, Canon FD Primes, GL Optics Canon 70-200 T2.9, Z-Speeds, Angenieux Optimo 24-290 T2.8
Color Grading: DI using DaVinci Resolve