The Art of Editing…

[Mark Suszko]

Was he in drag when he made the remarks?

[Glen Montgomery]

I’m with you. This fact was echoed by quite a few of the people at the viewing party I attended, who are not in the industry and didn’t know I worked in editorial. I was glad to have a couple “normal” people recognize the importance at least. I think it was even more of a blow because they did such a good job setting up the Sound Editing and Sound Mixing categories with the behind the scenes segment on the “Dark Knight”. Maybe the Academy thinks that more of the public already understands Editing and Cinematography, and therefore can be more playful.

[Arnie Schlissel]

I’m with you, Shane. In my experience, the editor organizes and orchestrates the entire post process, all while effecively re-writing the script, sculpting the performances of the actors and giving structure and form to the cinematography and sound recording.

We are not button pushers, we are film makers and artisans in our own right. We are collaborative artists, often without ever communicating even once with the other artists that we work with.

Arnie
Post production is not an afterthought!
https://www.arniepix.com/

[Dan Archer]

I agree with yo Shane, but I also see your wifes point. What we do is an art. Its very subjective. There are a million ways to put together a film and its up to us to figure out the best one.With out the editor, the best shot footage and captured audio is just a pile of useless pretty pictures with no form.

BUT. on the other hand try explaining that to your mom and or family next holiday. My grandmother used to think that when i was on vacation they would have to rerun shows on TV. I think that was a way of trying to explain what we do to a mass audience that has absolutely no clue. Hell I cant get my producer to understand it half the time. I do think it would have been better if TP was in drag for the segment but alas he was not. I have never understood why people think he is so funny.

A cut is a cut & a dissolve is a disolve, and not just anybody with a system is a pro.

[Grinner Hester]

I think people are either great story-tellers or they are not. Art is not something that can be tought… technique is. Nobody can write in a book the technique to properly edit any of my shows… unless they worked on one of my shows. The art is not the pacing or the structure of shots, the art of editing is making the client feel like these decisions were their idea.

[Shane Ross]

See that wonderful job they did explaining what sound effects editors? That was great? Why couldn’t they do the same for editors? Nope, we just cut from wide to close to medium, that’s all.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Graham Withers]

Was it just me or was that segment not only pointless and utterly banal but also, ironically, poorly cut? Possibly on purpose (just to illustrate how hard we editors work at making those tough decisions between CU, MS and Wide….)!

[Dan Archer]

I wouldnt give them that much credit………..No pun intended. And yes I thought it was switched a little wonky.

A cut is a cut & a dissolve is a disolve, and not just anybody with a system is a pro.

[Bill Davis]

All I can think of is 10 different newsgroups or forums on moviemaking crafts an in each the attendees are saying.

No, you’ve got to understand, what *I* do is what’s important. Without what *I* do this whole thing will fall apart.

And the truth is that they’re all more or less right.

But I’m sorry, but if you think the editor is MORE critical than the folks scoring the film, or the executive producer lining up the cash to pay for everything, or the costume designer working his or her ass off to make sure that nobody is wearing a 14th century design in a 13th century period piece, then you’re woefully ignorant of the whole process.

Look, I’m an editor. And I know that what I do is important. And I’m sorry to have to say it, but to take the next step into thinking that what I do is MORE important than what anyone else does is INSULTING to everyone else at best. And reeks of HUBRIS at worst.

The only people qualified to judge whether their job is more or less critical to overall success than another job is someone who had successfully done BOTH.

And so if you haven’t PRODUCED, or SCORED, or WRITTEN, or COSTUMED at the same level where you’re EDITING, then, sorry, but IMHO you are talking without a base of experiential support.

It’s EXTREMELY difficult to do ANYTHING at a high level. That certainly includes EDITING. But it includes most everything else as well.

And one final thought to stir the pot. Have you ever considered that your project might be every bit as successful as it is if it was edited in an entirely different way? That, in essence, there is never just ONE right way to edit something, but bunches of ways that the audience will happily accept and enjoy, and pay to view?

What does that mean in the overall scheme of things? What if what we do in editorial storytelling is not so unique or precious after all? And, just as with, for example, the craft of writing – there is plenty of room for journeymen writers (just like editors) who labor away doing corporate or business, or comedy writing for a variety of stuff and NEVER have their work tested against any standard of excellence simply by circumstance? Are they still good? Or are they less than good?

Are our gifts as editors so rare? Is everyone who owns their FCP system and put in the 10 years in the seat a “good” editor? If so, there are a MILLION+ registered and updated FCP seats alone out there. If just 10% of them are excellent, that’s 100,000 excellent editors we’re all competing against. Why might I be “better” than you, or Jane, or Raj? Better yet, why would any of us have the right to feel “superior” to the DP, or the scriptwriter, or the freeking Craft Services folks, who might well be a Cordon Blu dropout in these weird financial times, for heaven’t sake.

Sorry to ramble, but I’ve just finished riding heard on a large local charity effort, and I”m particularly sensitive right now to anyone who feels that THEIR contribution is “SUPERIOR” to anyone elses.

Without EVERYBODY motivated to do their best – you always risk falling short of excellence and having your work dragged down by the overall effort.

And casting your part as SUPERIOR to someone else’s is a VERY bad way to set yourself up for long term success in this kind of necessarily collaborative field.

My 2 cents anyway.

[Shane Ross]

I’m not trying to sell myself as superior to any of those people in any way. I didn’t exclude them because I feel the Composer has any less impact, or that costumes are unimportant. I just didn’t want my list of “we are just as important to the production as…” and then have a list of feature credits follow.

There is a perceived level of importance/contribution to a film that most everyone agrees to. There is a “line” and there are those “above the line” and those “below the line.” Producers, directors, actors…above the line. Meaning that they get more money and residuals and all that because a movie can fail or succeed due to their contribution. Below the line is seen as the craftspeople…the people who work on the film. But I feel that a few of those people need to be ABOVE the line, Editors included. I’m not being snooty or self important, just observant.

Read “When the Shooting Stops, the Cutting Begins” and see how editors have completely SAVED films from total ruin, including Annie Hall, that won an Oscar for Best Picture. The original script, the original edit…the film was a convoluted mess! The producers saw it, Woody saw it. It took Woody and the editor a few months to make it work, completely changing the focus of the film. Diane Keaton was not the original focus…she was a side character originally. The recut obviously changed that.

And yes, DPs contribute a lot, and composers (god, I have seen many good films made tepid with bad music), and costume design, art direction. But I didn’t want to get into all of that…I just wanted to comment on Tyler Perry’s rather simplistic way of describing what editors do…after the great way Sound Mixing was shown.

But they also dissed Cinematography…not even showing clips from the films that were nominated…while Art Direction got beautiful treatment. I guess it was give and take…most years they focus on editing and cinematography, so why not THIS year show Art Direction and Sound Mixing? Costumes?

Whatever, you are reading too much into my post. I am not a prima dona that thinks that editors are more important than everyone else. But I feel that they are more important than most people think they are. Otherwise why would producers and directors be so concerned about who they get to edit their film?

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def