The Invisible Cut Page 5

  —“Voice over”: recorded narration added to what’s on screen that can be recorded later.

  —“Wild track”: sound recorded on the set or later, not meant to be exactly synchronized, and usually capturing ambient sounds such as crowd noise or random dialogue. It can be especially useful for the editor as background sound to connect a discontinuous cut.

  Since the film editor does the initial dialogue editing, his primary goal is to make sure the dialogue is as smooth from shot to shot as he can make it, in terms of tone, volume, and background noise. He does as much as he can with what he has, sometimes even stealing bits of dialogue from different takes, because the natural sound that was captured on the set is usually best.

  Overlapping Dialogue

  The audience often knows what a character is going to say before he finishes speaking. They may also be eager to see the other character’s reaction, in which case the editor can “overlap the dialogue,” that is, continue to play the soundtrack of the previous shot until someone in the new shot starts talking. Some editors let two or three words spill over on cuts as a stylistic technique, to tie the shots together; but a significant overlap will usually happen only for a reason. The dialogue in a scene can naturally overlap if there is high energy and emotion, and that can be challenging for an editor. If there are only two actors, the filmmakers can have a camera on each actor and one track running for both of them, so they will be naturally overlapping whenever the editor cuts to each actor. What happens is often more complex. The editor may have to overlap the closer shots through editing and also use more distant, multi-actor angles where the dialogue overlaps within the shot. Creating a consistent flow and momentum in the track, while always being on the appropriate actor, can require real editing finesse.

  MUSIC

  Music and movies both involve sequence and rhythm, and the philosophy for editing them is similar. There has to be a justifiable reason to make a film or music cut, and once the full impact is reached, it’s time for the editor to cut. The roles of the film editor and music editor also overlap, since either one of them at various times may collaborate on what music is chosen for the picture.

  There are three types of music.

  —“Source”: a sequence of music or a song that is taken from a definable source to accompany a scene or can be heard in the background coming from, for instance, a radio or CD player.

  —“Playback”: pre-recorded music that accompanies any singers, musicians, or dancers performing in a movie.

  —“Score”: music written by a composer specifically for a movie.

  The editor has to know the way music is used in different types of movies. Although it’s difficult to generalize, in horror movies and some action movies, usually the music is highly synchronized, because it exists not just for emotional impact but also as an effect. Music in physical comedy is usually well synchronized, too, coming from the influence of cartoons. Music in romantic movies often has a more sweeping effect and is less specific.

  The editor must also understand the psychological impact of music. It may act as a counterpoint to the mood or the content of a scene. For instance, bittersweet music accompanying a happy scene may reveal something foreboding or a sad reminder of the past. Music may also heighten emotion, such as tension or fear. A burst of music can shock or surprise, especially during or after a period of silence. It can be used as a link in time and/or space to help smooth out a jump in the storyline or for a “montage,” which is a sequence of shots that compresses the narrative, usually without dialogue. The absence of music can be a significant part of the movie’s score, since silence makes its own powerful statement. For instance, if the movie is playing on its own and is already as effective as it can be, then, in principle, music shouldn’t be added. Music may also soften a moment that shouldn’t be softened. For example, a deathbed scene may be more bearable with music, when in fact the effect that the director wants is for the scene to be unbearably painful.

  If an audience hears a song or score after they’ve seen a movie, and it makes them vividly remember the scene that accompanied it, or if they think back on a scene and remember the feeling the score or song created, then the music has done its job.

  Film editors have always cut montages to music, and since the innovative sixties and even more so since the advent of computers in the eighties, editors can easily add as much music as they want to their first cut without the expense of going on a mixing stage. Because of this, directors have come to expect that virtually the whole movie will be cut to music and that it will accompany the movie at a very early stage in the editing process. Yet music can also have a seductive effect, giving the filmmakers false confidence in the movie’s quality. It can smooth over bumpy moments and give an energy boost to the pacing, so that mediocre film (extra “fat”) stays in the movie when it shouldn’t.

  In general there are really no hard-and-fast rules about editing music. For instance, when editing a montage to a song, the preferred choice may be to have the visual cut come in on the music’s “downbeat,” the prominent first beat of a measure, or on a percussive word. This “hard cut” is emphatic and calls attention to itself, but sometimes that choice can be too obvious. Instead “a soft cut,” letting the picture cut come in between beats or on the second or third beat of a four-beat measure, for example, can feel more fluid.

  An editor should not, as a rule, cut his images exactly to the beat of the music, because it will seem as if the music is pulling the visuals along. Because of the time lag of picture to sound, there’s a rule of thumb for music editing: when music is intended to be cut on a beat, it should come three frames after the picture cut.

  When the editor is cutting the movie to a song, he also has to consider not only the beat, but also the lyrics and how they all relate to the mood, style, and content of the film. In the final analysis, the choices that the music and film editor make are by no means mathematical or scientific. An editor develops a visceral feeling, an instinct that tells him where to cut for the images and music to move together in a satisfying way. As film editor Carol Littleton says, “You want it to be unpredictable; you don’t just want to be a metronome. You want it to follow the phrase, you want it to follow the turn of the words of the song, or the instrumentation, you want it to fit into that glove. I always think of cutting to music, you’re not forcing it, you want it to be a good fit, so which pinky you put in first, you know, it all has to be in some way harmonious.”3

  CHAPTER 10

  * * *

  THE ACT COMES TOGETHER

  After the film editor puts a movie into a first cut, music and sound editors add other elements. There will be a series of what’s called “temp dubs” or “scratch mixes,” in which more sound and music will be added beyond what the film editor has already done.

  How many screenings take place between the first cut, preview, and final mix depends on budget, time, what the director wants, what the studio demands, and the specific needs and problems with the movie. A period film or a movie heavily dependent on opticals, where much of the location sound is unusable, will require more postproduction work. Sometimes all the temp mixes will be done on a computer, but it’s always preferable to do a pre-mix on a sound stage, because of the expertise of the technicians who mix and equalize all the sound elements.

  SPOTTING

  The sound designer will have a “spotting session” sometime before the final mix, where he’ll run the movie with the director and film editor, and they will decide what existing sound needs to be fixed and what special sounds are needed. The dialogue editor will try to salvage whatever original dialogue he can. (The amount of rerecorded dialogue on a movie averages about 30%.) The music editor will also have a spotting session where the movie will be screened with the composer, director, and film editor. Because sound effects have become increasingly complex and musical, the music spotting session may include the sound designer. The music editor will add some score and songs and, in some case
s, replace some of the film editor’s choices, but not if they’re working. Songs that accompany montages, or visual sequences like chase scenes that were specifically cut to songs, may stay in the movie. A song may be chosen as early as the script stage or at any point during the editing process or the composer will write a new song to replace the temporary version. The temp score will always be replaced by that of the composer.

  PREVIEWS

  While the film editor usually sits in on the spotting, recording, and scoring sessions, the editor will always sit in on the final mix. His opinions may be needed, but he is even more vital as a technical resource. For instance, he may need to pull a piece of sound, dialogue, or music from another part of the movie if the director is unhappy with what he hears on the mixing stage. Also, he may be aware of useful sound or film not yet in the final cut, since he knows more about what was shot than anyone else.

  The most delicate role the editor will play is during previews when the movie is screened at a theater, and the final changes are made based on the audience’s reaction. The director is really under duress at this time because the movie will now be judged by the outside world. The stress is often increased if the director is being pressured by the studio or the producer — or both — to make changes he disagrees with. The editor can be expected to magically fix problems or can be unfairly blamed for flaws that he had no control over. This is the last chance for everyone to give their input, and the editor becomes the final hope before the studio releases the movie out into the cold, cruel world.

  At this late stage the relationship between the director and editor is really tested, because this is the time when the editor will most likely be put in a political squeeze between the director, producer, studio executives, and on and on. Even though the producer may have more power and may be signing his paycheck, the editor should remain loyal to the director. If the editor finds himself agreeing with others on certain points and disagreeing with the director, this is fine as long as the editor is up-front about his differences and doesn’t go behind the director’s back. If the editor does make changes for the producer or studio that the director doesn’t want, the editor must tell the director what he’s doing. The worst thing an editor can do is to deceive the director, or try to please both sides. Although all these situations are potentially precarious, and the worst sort of studio politics can certainly play out, the best defense for the editor and director is the strength of their relationship, because then it’s hard for anyone to come between them.

  There’s an additional danger. The editor and director have been working on the movie for so long that their attention to detail and general closeness to the movie can make them lose perspective. For instance, they may not be aware that the story is confusing at a certain point, because they know it too well. Or they could just be numb to the impact of certain special moments that originally made them laugh or cry. But the shock of the preview should make them keyed up and tuned in to the audience. Both the preview cards and the post-screening discussions from a selected part of the audience can be helpful. The questions, however, can be so specific that the audience may give conflicting input — one person’s favorite scene may be another’s least favorite — and may focus more on particular problems than on the overall movie. Because it’s so easy to get overwhelmed by all the input, it’s often true that the gut reactions from the audience — in which they laugh, scream, or just fidget in their seats and show boredom — are more revealing than all the postmortems and words scribbled on cards. The director and editor should be open to suggestions, but they should never forget their reactions at that first viewing, when they assessed the movie’s strengths and weaknesses and were clear on what needed to be done. The director and editor should trust themselves. Ultimately they are the most capable judges of what’s best for the movie, because they’ve lived and breathed it. They know it better than anyone — and probably care the most.

  CHAPTER 11

  * * *

  THE MARRIAGE OF THE EDITOR AND DIRECTOR

  No other crew member will ever spend as much time alone with the director as the editor does, and the relationship between them functions much like a marriage. If the chemistry of their two personalities click, if they’re both willing to listen to and respect each other’s opinions, are both prepared to give and take, and most of all trust each other, then they’ll have a healthy relationship.

  If there’s an editing issue that is really important, and the editor strongly believes his position is the right one, he should speak up and fight for it. Sometimes, though, if the director is really off base, the editor has to trust that, just by letting the director see a part of the film edited his way, the director will eventually see the error of his ways. By the same token the editor should also be willing to try something even if it seems ridiculous, even if it’s upside down and backward. Refusing to try simply means his ego is getting in the way.

  The marriage is tested at various times, especially when others become more involved in the movie. Even when the marriage is good, the editor must always be able to choose his battles and not fall into the trap of needing credit for an idea or being right for its own sake. And although this is a partnership, it is not an equal one, nor should it be. The movie belongs to the director, and the editor should try to make him happy and honor his vision. The editor should also be mindful of the fact that the director is the one who’s ultimately on the line. If the movie bombs, the director gets hurt the most. If it’s a hit, there’s enough glory for everyone.

  If the relationship sustains itself over more than one movie, this unique balancing act between the roles of director and editor does settle into a pattern. And like a marriage, the longer the relationship lasts and the more successful it is over time, the more there is an implicit understanding and predictability to the partnership. That comfort level is invaluable.

  Carol Littleton, who worked on Body Heat* and The Big Chill,* has had a very long-term relationship with the director of those movies, Lawrence Kasdan. She has the following to say about their “marriage”:

  CL: I would have to say I think the world of Larry and we have a very similar film aesthetic. He doesn’t even have to say anything — he’ll make a move in a chair or he’ll straighten up or he’ll cough or something; all of that’s meaning to me. I know when he’s acting and reacting.

  BO [Bobbie O’Steen]: Did you know that early on?

  CL: Instantly. I just had a very strong sense of the kind of man Larry is, the sort of integrity he has as a filmmaker, as a person, those two are inseparable. I had respect for him the very first time we met that has grown over all these years.

  Larry has always said, “You just do it the way you feel it first and then we’ll talk about it. Just go ahead, try anything you want. I want to see what you come up with.” Many times when Larry was directing, we’d go to dailies and the only thing he would say is, “I think that shot should go first,” and usually that’s it. There’ll be parts of takes and he’ll say, “I really like that, I really like that.”

  He doesn’t speak that much in dailies and he doesn’t really ever tell me that much; he really wants to see how I’ll do it because it gives him fresh ideas. That’s not to say he doesn’t have very distinct ideas about how he wants things to go.… I’ve worked with a lot of directors and I really try to understand what they need in an editor, because I see my job as an editor as two-fold: One is to interpret what the director wants and his unique view of the material and the other thing is that I want to tell the story in the best way possible.4

  Another editor who developed long-term relationships with directors was Sam O’Steen. For thirty years O’Steen was editor to director Mike Nichols, with whom he collaborated on The Graduate.* O’Steen also edited four movies for Roman Polanski, one of which was Chinatown.* O’Steen was able to develop an understanding of each of their personalities and adapt to their different working styles.

  BO [Bobbie O’Steen]: Polanski and Nichols
are very different in their strengths and styles.

  SO [Sam O’Steen]: If you want somebody to make something funny, you get Mike to do it. If you want somebody to make something scary, you get Polanski to do it. They can’t do each other’s thing… Words were all important to Nichols. He would say, “I don’t like how that guy says so and so.” Then I’d go through all the outtakes and find a different inflection… Polanski is the best with the camera of anybody I’ve ever worked with. I can’t even explain it, but when I look at his film, I know it’s his film, that he shot it. And his film tells me where to cut, really speaks loud to me, whereas the others, it whispers to me.

  BO: Did you cut differently for each of them?

  SO: Well, to use sound as an example, Polanski tends to overlap a little bit, he likes the sound to go just a little over to the next cut because he feels it ties them together. Nichols doesn’t like overlaps. He likes more of a punch.

  BO: And working with the two of them in the cutting room?

  SO: Nichols is funny. Especially on the first couple of movies, when he’d first run a cut sequence, he wouldn’t like it, he’d be jumpy about it, and give me a lot of changes.

  BO: Did you make them?

  SO: Not if I didn’t agree. On the next running I would say, “I didn’t have time to get to it” and pretty soon he would relax, get used to it.

  BO: And Polanksi?

  SO: He’d like to run my cuts back and forth again and again.

  BO: But he wasn’t looking for matched cuts.

  SO: No, he just wanted to see the flow, see if it worked or didn’t work. But both Nichols and Polanski were always real kind to me, they would tell me, “That’s great” about certain things. I would often give Nichols surprises on the first cut, and he loved that.