Go backBack to selection

“Loads of the Story Was Abstracted”: Editor Irfan Van Tuijl on Mad Bills to Pay

A man is leaning on a fence as large birds fly overhead.Still from Mad Bills to Pay.

Joel Alfonso Vargas has adapted his short May It Go Beautifully for You, Rico into the feature-length Mad Bills to Pay (or Destiny, dile que no soy malo), part of the 2025 Sundance Film Festival’s NEXT section. The film follows the carefree Rico as he attempts to get his life together when his girlfriend gets pregnant.

Editor Irfan Van Tuijl, who edited May It Go Beautifully for You, Rico reprised his roll for Mad Bills to Pay. Below, he explains what it’s like to cut a film that is composed entirely of master shots and what kind of material was left on the cutting room floor.

See all responses to our annual Sundance editor interviews here.

Filmmaker: How and why did you wind up being the editor of your film? What were the factors and attributes that led to your being hired for this job?

Van Tuijl: Joel Vargas and I worked together on our graduation project in film school. I had worked previously on very loud, fast-paced, fast-cut projects, and Joel was the polar opposite of that. The fact that we had such different styles ultimately was what drew me to the project. There were also a bunch of technical aspects to how Joel likes to work that I was familiar with, and the fact that I am very familiar with New York also helped. 

What was interesting about this film was the fact that we had previously made a short film based on this project. I had edited that, and Joel and I used this as an opportunity to really dig deep into the world of Rico. By the time we got to making the feature, we were already familiar with what the rushes had to offer, and I had gotten to know what he liked and didn’t. The short and the feature are two completely different beasts, but having that previous collaboration made things easier. 

Filmmaker: In terms of advancing your film from its earliest assembly to your final cut, what were your goals as an editor? What elements of the film did you want to enhance, or preserve, or tease out or totally reshape?

Van Tuijl: What made editing this film really tricky is the fact that we didn’t shoot coverage in a traditional sense. The film is shot using master shots; each scene is one single shot, and all the scenes have a certain degree of improvised dialogue. So, our only tools for shaping the film were when we would enter and leave a scene. 

Joel loves making the audience catch up to the story. Compared to our assembly, loads of the story was abstracted. As an example, we had shot a lot more scenes introducing Destiny and the fact that she was pregnant, but we ended up leaving this out and revealing the pregnancy only when Rico tells it to his family; we are only introduced to Destiny when she is introduced to the family. The role of the family was also critical to this film. The story is about Rico and Destiny, but the family adds a beautiful dynamic that makes the world really come alive. We had to find a fine balance of how much we wanted to show them. Adding too much family made the story feel bloated and unfocused, but cutting them out too much meant that the story world felt very small. 

Filmmaker: How did you achieve these goals? What types of editing techniques, or processes, or feedback screenings allowed this work to occur?

Van Tuijl: Our main tool was rhythm. Because each scene was only one shot, the rhythm of the edit became a very delicate balance. We would find that changing an in-point somewhere up front would completely change how a sequence would feel 20 minutes down the line. Ultimately, we created a language which we called our “A-B system”. We would try TO switch between having a strong, loud, intense scene and following that with a more pensive, quiet, reflective scene. This slow build-up and release of tension helped shape the film’s form. 

Filmmaker: As an editor, how did you come up in the business, and what influences have affected your work?

Van Tuijl: I actually started as a camera assistant and colorist, but the more I got involved in the process of filmmaking, the more I began to realise that editing was really the part of the process I was most interested in. I like the narrative puzzle. Most of my experience is in cutting shorts. I had done other feature-length projects previously, but nothing to this extent. I had the privilege of learning my craft from some incredible editors, including Mick Audsley, Andy Worboys and Ewa J. Lind. I love seeing how other editors approach their problems. It’s a subjective art, and there are endless ways to find solutions in the edit. I’ve always been inspired by a wide range of filmmakers, from Gaspar Noé to Spike Jonze, as well as editors like Sally Menke and Cécile Decugis, who really push the boundaries of what’s possible in the edit. 

Filmmaker: What editing system did you use, and why?

Van Tuijl: We did the original assembly in Avid but moved to Resolve when Joel and I decided to co-edit the film. Joel knew how to use Resolve, and due to my previous stint as a colorist, I was also very familiar with the software. Even though I do still prefer cutting in Avid (for now), Resolve really is an incredible tool. We wanted to be able to color correct and do sound editing, graphics and any cleanup effects on the fly and all in the same software, and Resolve is really powerful and fast in that aspect. Because Joel’s style relies so heavily on these single-take master shots, we wanted to be able to view and work on the film in a form that was as close to final online quality as possible even though we were still in the early offline edit. I’m excited to see how Resolve continues improving its editing capabilities. It’s a software that is rapidly evolving, and the idea of being able to make a feature film in one single piece of software from start to finish would be exciting. 

Filmmaker: What was the most difficult scene to cut and why? And how did you do it?  

Van Tuijl: Our most difficult section to cut was Rico’s final crisis and realization to the fact that he needs to change. We had shot different versions and even did pickups for this section of the film, but we ultimately decided to go a more abstract route. We tried many different iterations but always felt something was lacking in Rico’s journey when we clarified this section too much, Rico’s turning point decision just felt too easy. Without spoiling too much, we landed on a version that allowed the audience to have some space but also still allowed them to follow Rico’s decision on an emotional level. Sometimes, showing less is more. 

Filmmaker: What role did VFX work, or compositing, or other post-production techniques play in terms of the final edit?

Van Tuijl: Joel wanted the film to be as naturalistic as possible and actually likes the rough edges. We did do some frame blends to hide cuts within scenes but kept this to a minimum. Rather than trying to clean and “fix” imperfections in the edit we actually leaned into them. 

Filmmaker: Finally, now that the process is over, what new meanings has the film taken on for you? What did you discover in the footage that you might not have seen initially, and how does your final understanding of the film differ from the understanding that you began with?

Van Tuijl: I think what we learnt is that the film wasn’t just about Rico’s journey. The characters around him are also very strong and all deserve their own arcs within the film. I think initially, because we relied so heavily on improvisation, we had a real fear that the film would feel inconsistent or that things wouldn’t come together because we lacked the coverage. What we ended up doing was using these limitations to our strengths, and we ultimately built the story around that.

© 2025 Filmmaker Magazine. All Rights Reserved. A Publication of The Gotham