-
Editing Today – another Philippic
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “That’s one tiny aspect of what editing can achieve – and probably the least important in a narrative context. (Let’s not forget that in narrative you often want to expand “the information flow” rather than speed it up – it’s a very commonly used tactic for dramatic, comedic, emotional effect – you only have to consider the use of slow-motion for this same purpose.)”
I believe you’re misunderstanding me.
Explain please, how you can do any of the above without CUTTING the flow.
That’s all I’m saying.
To change real time (or place) to an alternate time or place to maintain, accelerate, or slow the flow of information to the viewer, we cut. And when we cut, we, by necessity – interrupt. If the interuption makes sense and is done with grace, the viewer doesn’t notice.
But an interruption, it is.
That IS editing.
And your line:
Sure it’s important when we’re simply bashing together assemblies of material, but in terms of “telling a story” (that much overworked phrase), it just isn’t that relevant in the great scheme of things.
I’ll put aside the implied insult.
And respond with the assertion that sometimes STORY, too, isn’t all that relevant in the great scheme of things. If I need to know how to properly inject a patient with insulin, I will gladly eschew the STORY for clear, proper linear instruction. Something that a video video can do and, perhaps, save lives in the process.
I LOVE stories. I just don’t think they’re the exclusive holy grail of every single editing project that the world needs to see.
Narrative filmmaking is ONE form of the practice of storytelling. To argue everything as if that is the ONLY form worthy of anyones interest, training or practice is like arguing that since only OPERA involves singing, acting live performance and the arts of stagecraft – then OPERA alone is the highest expression of human art. Some people are obsessed with Opera. And others are NOT.
And so to an Opera-obsessed person “CINEMA” may fall into the Vulgar arts and is therefore common and silly.
These very arguments were made against “cinema” at the dawn of the form.
Now you’re making the same assertions about “cinema” verses simple “video” as if practitioners of the latter are somehow, de facto, incapable of understanding the finer points of the form.
And it’s depressing to see these debates framed in a form where theatrical movies and long form television editing is the ONLY editing worth anyone’s attention.
It’s as silly a view as my doggerel about Opera above.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
I don’t feel that way. There are always a couple of badly cut movies every year but overall it’s great. I mean the level of the craft today is very high. You may get different impression if you run into something amateurish like Whiplash and then some mess by Michael Bay but if you watch a dozen current movies in a row you’d feel most of them are pretty well done. And performances today are amazing.
-
I don’t mind cuts, I don’t mind quantity over quality, but I hate cuts when there’s not a thought behind them.
Case in point, news promos. I work in a shop where a lot of them are made. Sometimes an editor will start throwing in a bunch of cuts of images and they don’t lead anywhere. They’re just a bunch of images being thrown at you and it starts feeling like someone hitting you over the head with a hammer. Sometimes they don’t even follow a soundtrack.
I like when a cut is crafted. A cutaway to a different angle, different framing, directing focus, leading you somewhere.
-
Spielberg has talked about it a lot. He said he likes to make scenes where in a way, the audience does their ‘own’ cutting.
I don’t agree with it completely, because his staging is as such that he really draws your attention to stuff.If you haven’t seen this already, you really are gonna like these videos:
https://vimeo.com/94684922
This last video, check it out at 2.55, the long shot from Jurassic Park. Check the timing of those movements. When Tim says to the Sam Neil Character: I’m gonna be in YOUR car. How the movement of the camera, really gives you this FEELING about the change in Sam Neil’s feeling.
That shot is amazing because it’s subtle but genius at the same time. He really is one of my biggest inspirations, Spielberg 🙂Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Vimeo framework” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Mathieu Ghekiere] “If you haven’t seen this already, you really are gonna like these videos: “
Yes, those videos are a really good examination of this – especially the point that instead of being flashy, bravura set-pieces which are designed to draw attention to themselves (and take you out of the movie), Spielberg’s “long takes” are “designed to be invisible”.
It’s fascinating to see how much cutting is avoided using this technique.
Of course, we shouldn’t suggest that Spielberg is doing something radical here – this is just good old-fashioned movie staging that you see perfected in so many classic films.
Related to this, Tim has a great article on Gregg Toland that explores deep focus and composition – an excellent read.
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com -
The only problem I have with these discussions is that it makes it seems that all of a sudden, every celluloid movie pre1990 or so, whether shot on film or edited on a flatbed, is suddenly more crafted and therefore by default better, and every film that was digitally crafted from acquisition to delivery, is worse.
There is a wealth of really sh*tty movies that were shot and edited in the “old school” way. I take it no one has watched Look Who’s Talking Too?
Film as culture, and the tools used to create those reflections on the culture, amount to a snapshot of the times. If you look behind the scenes, you can find out what was going on in the culture, sometimes politically, most of the time industrially (meaning the technology available to those people, at that place, at that time).
If any one of the directors that have been mentioned in this thread started from where we are starting today, do you think they would use the same process that was used from the 30s to the 90s? My guess would be an emphatic, “hells naw!”.
In today’s VFX heavy movies, I feel like sometimes the editing done is practical to save on VFX costs. The Avengers, which I found to be a really entertaining movie, had some odd and quick cuts because I think if the shots were longer, or more grand, the movie’ budget literally would have had to have been an order of magnitude higher, from an already really high budget. I imagine as Producer, you have to pick your battles, or pick your battle scenes as it were.
So, while we can complain about the state of certain accepts of movie making, I do think some of these choices are extremely practical, in that, they are made due to the technologic and logistical limits of the times, just like every other movie ever made since the advent of film.
-
Indeed. You see it back in a lot of classic movies. I think it’s just because he grew up with those and those were his inspiration.
But his work is now an inspiration for a lot of us 🙂Thanks for the article, I read it. Big fan of Citizen Kane, btw. One of those movies of which I felt the hype was very deserved.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “In today’s VFX heavy movies, I feel like sometimes the editing done is practical to save on VFX costs. The Avengers, which I found to be a really entertaining movie, had some odd and quick cuts because I think if the shots were longer, or more grand, the movie’ budget literally would have had to have been an order of magnitude higher, from an already really high budget. I imagine as Producer, you have to pick your battles, or pick your battle scenes as it were.”
Speaking of The Avengers (a film I also really enjoyed), check out the newest installment of Tony Zhou’s amazing series Every Frame a Painting.
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Vimeo framework” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
Akira Kurosawa – Composing Movement from Tony Zhou on Vimeo.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
https://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums -
[David Lawrence] “Speaking of The Avengers (a film I also really enjoyed), check out the newest installment of Tony Zhou’s amazing series Every Frame a Painting. “
Ha! Perfect!
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up