Film Editing

Many people cannot define what film editors are or do. This
is understandable, for editors have never been celebrities.
Editing involves not nearly a theoretical consideration of the
effect of one shot upon another, or a linear rendition of a
script, or a mechanical measurement of frames. It is all
that and much more- rhythm, instinct, emotion,
psychology, art- and it draws from the total talent of one
person, the editor, who collaborates with the director to
create a cumulative sensory event.

For starters, editors organize minutiae, intensify subtleties,

heighten emotions, and blend countless elements of image
and sound to create a film. Unlike film directors, however,
editors are not accustomed to explaining their work to an
inquisitive outsider. They often respond to requests for
interviews with hesitation, a momentary loss for words,
surprise that someone is even asking who they are and
what they do. But once involved in an interview, like other
creative people behind the screen, editors become
articulate expounders of their complex art.

Following the introduction of sound into film at the end of

the 1920's, filmmakers were now obligated to combine
greater number of elements in the editing process;
dialogue, music, and sound effects. A prime example of this
can be seen in the movie "Singing in the Rain," where the
ups and downs of introducing music and words to the
filmmaking process is portrayed.

Editing became locked into preserving the flow of dialogue

as recorded during production. Only after the novelty of
sound had worn off could words, music, and sound effects
to enhance the visual become the enterprise of the editor.
Overlapping dialogue, manipulating volume, using
subliminal sounds and silence, and cutting action-reaction
shots to dialogue were among the new considerations faced
in the editing process.

Over time, certain directors and editors have been able to

work together on successive projects and thus have
developed a kind of "buddy system" in which the film would
be cut by someone who understood the director's vision. A
few editors also exerted great influence on directors and
producers.

Editing is the movement and

manipulation of frames, within which
more movement takes place
Once a good working relationship is established, many
directors request to work with the same crew in their future
projects. Directors such as Stephen Spielberg, Oliver Stone
and George Lucas are just a couple of names that have
used the same editor, composer, cinematographer, etc. is
several of their films.

Because directors names are so prominent in feature

releases, if a film is critiqued from an editorial perspective,
the director would usually be cited for its success or failure.
This is almost always the case even though the director's
degree of involvement in the editing could vary
considerably.

The demise of the studio system in the late 1940's and

1950's virtually destroyed job security and created a highly
competitive free-lance market. Editors now often speak of
the unsettling reality of being unemployed for long
sketches, not knowing when the next job will come.

Directors shoot from more camera positions and with more

takes that might increase options in editing; so film
"coverage" increased, obligating editors to organize and
reduce the amount of footage sometimes in ratios of thirty
to forty to one (ratio footage exposed to footage used in
the final cut).

Still, the greatest challenge in reaching modern audiences

and creating outstanding films is understanding one's
specialty. Today's filmmaking places enormous
responsibilities on each major mind behind a movie:
scriptwriter (preproduction), cinematographer (production),
and editor (postproduction), who are all answerable to the
director and producer.
Editors need to understand and articulate the inner
workings of their specialty- equipment, job pressures,
working methods, theories, and instincts.

One universal principle that distinguishes good from bad

editing is rhythm and musicality. Equally important is the
subliminal power of editing. Viewers often say that editing
is invisible to them unless the film is slowed down and
analyzed frame by frame.
This invisibility is perhaps a principal reason that editing is
seldom considered while watching a movie; it is not as
tangible as costumes, photography, music, or acting.
Editing is the movement and manipulation of frames, within
which more movement takes place, but audiences forget
the physical passage of the film itself and become absorbed
in the movement of the story.
In the olden days when film machinery was very primitive,
a smooth-running film was non-existent. Every splice, cut
and edit could be observed. These days with the ever-
improving quality of editing techniques (digital editing for
example) to notice a flaw in a picture is virtually non-
existent. The editor must continually remember both the
moving pieces of film and the moving images on the film,
for both must work together simultaneously. Dozens of
joined shots fly past the eye at twenty-four frames per
second, and the cumulative impact is of an overall image,
emotion or sensation.

Editors will agree that successful-memorable-editing makes

visual and emotional connections between seemingly
unrelated items. Connections between a film's characters,
relationships, and environment all derive from a
subconscious ability to discover layers.

The solitary nature of the job stresses organization,

discipline, persistence, self-reliance, and tireless devotion
to details. Yet all editors recognize the importance of
collaboration, particularly with the director, and a generally
soft-spoken nature can be an asset to the give and take
nature of the business. Editors never forget that the
director must be the unifying mind behind the project, and
they remain servant to that vision. The ideal relationship
between editor and director is a close familial one, in some
cases spanning decades of trusted collaboration.

Editors tend to work beyond the cutting- through previews,

premieres, re-releases; sometimes they are even
reengaged for television adaptations and reconstruction's
years later. Unfortunately, film editors (like sound editors,
who are even more constrained by last-minute demands)
face short budgets, short schedules, and short tempers.
Despite these limitations, editors are uniformly devoted to
their primary responsibility: to make real the directors
vision. This duty involves speaking up when they feel the
director is too close to the film to see its flaws. Enter the
editor as "objective eye."

A film editor is looking at the picture with complete

objectivity... they should try very hard to pretend they're
the audience

All editors live by what is in the footage, not what the

scriptwriter or director hoped would be there. A film editor
is looking at the picture with complete objectivity, not
subjectively, and they should try very hard to pretend
they're the audience so that if something is not working,
they should be the first one to know and can fix it.
The director, the producer and the editor are generally the
three people who spend the most time on a film. In most
cases, the editor is there from the first day of shooting until
the film is released into the movie theater.
How do editors begin? Carol Littleton starts with the script.
It will be her responsibility to help bring the project from
script to screen, and there are always certain things to look
for. "I use the script as my main criterion for whether or not
I want to do the picture. I like to see a really good strong
story with well-defined characters. I look for structure. I
don't always get it." At the very least you have to see a
possibility for restructuring in editing. There are so many
variables over the course of a film being shot and edited
that you really want a good script for your bible.

Once the editor has read the script and made the decision
to come aboard, the first day on the job usually co-insides
with the first day of production. "At rehearsals, I'm looking
to be a quiet auditor. It allows me to have a sense of the
film, to experience it somewhat before it is actually shot. I
also get a better perception of the problems that the actors
encounter. I take notes so that when the moment comes
that I'm no longer fresh with the material, I can re-
experience the emotional arc of the film. Frequently, there
are scripts that represent such a challenge, the editors
wonder if they can pull it off," States Joe Hutshing.

On the other hand, there are those rare occasions when a

great script can simplify the editor's job.
Normally when you get a script and start talking with the
director, you realize there is a whole bunch of material that
is unneeded and can be cut at the very beginning.
The raw footage comes in each day, and the editor shows
these "dailies" to the director. "I'm hoping to be able to see
in dailies the essential focus of the director's attention,
what he was going through on each take. When you first
look at the picture, you're looking for the story. The number
one object is to keep the story moving, reveal the details of
the story, and get the best performances. You make the
actors look as good as you possibly can but most of all the
objective is clarity."
The biggest sin is to be redundant. The next biggest is to
have things that are truly extraneous. Inevitably it gets
back to what to leave in and what to cut out. Carol Littleton
tries to cut "things that really do not contribute to the
through-line of the picture."
The best editing is usually invisible. The effect that I always
try for is that it looks as if it comes straight out of the
camera that way, so you're not aware of all the cuts.

The editor must resist the temptation to "overcut" in an

attempt to get in every cherished moment.
Once the production has wrapped, the pressure shifts to
the editor to produce an initial cut of the film.
In the first assembly Joe Hutshing tries to follow the script
as closely as possible. "I try to be true to what was written
and try to make it work, exactly as the script has it. Once
that has been done then you can start making
interpretations of it, refining it." Carol Littleton also states
that there comes a time when the editor must be willing to
let go of the script.
Editors are put in a position many times of sharing the
knowledge they have of objectivity with directors who may
have less, and guiding them through the treacherous
labyrinth of making a movie. Many times directors become
so emotionally attached to a project that they do not see
faults that others observe. Editors are now more involved in
the dissemination of knowledge than they had been in the
past. Editors, cinematographers, production designers, and
so on essentially have more experience than directors do.

Oliver stone tries to remain as flexible as possible and

considers the editing process itself "the last rewrite."

While a director may spend years putting a single project

together, editors spend weeks on it and then move on.
"When I'm in the dark, alone, and I'm looking at the film
for the first time, it's very exciting. Then when the director
comes in, you're dealing with the mind and heart of the
person who has the most intimate knowledge of the film.
You go through problems together, talk, hash it over, find
solutions. It's you two at the end. It really is magic. We're
sort of alchemists. We put a lot of elements together, and
we're hoping to make it gold."
Oliver stone tries to remain as flexible as possible and
considers the editing process itself "the last rewrite." Often
he will edit individual scenes so that the dialogue is
delivered in an order very different from how it was
scripted and shot. Indeed, the use of multiple editors has
become something of an Oliver Stone trademark.
Hutshing doesn't mind. "I enjoy the collaboration and I also
like to see what other editors can do. I make a pass on a
scene and give it to somebody else. I can get bored with
scenes so if you're switching around with another editor, for
me, it's actually a lot of fun."

Increasingly, the image of the editor working "alone in the

dark" is being replaced with the reality of multiple editors.
Hutshing attributes this to postproduction times pressure.
"I think the studios want to see a return on their money
faster, so a way of shortening the time is to put multiple
editors on each project."
If actors can inspire one another to do their best work, why
not editors? It provides another example of how the art of
filmmaking is increasingly collaborative in nature.
Editors and directors tend to form long-term relationships
and work together on many projects. each knows what to
expect from the other. Each has certain needs that must be
fulfilled if the collaboration is to be successful. What the
editor really wants from the director is coverage- enough
material to work with because the director is producing the
material from which a movie is going to be made. If you
have coverage, you have flexibility. Shooting from several
angles, different lighting and focus, and several takes are
all essential in providing an editor with adequate film to
work with.
There are always unforeseen problems; maybe some
scenes are overwritten and say more than they need to
say. If you've got good coverage you can still create a
perfectly smooth flowing scene that serves its purpose. Of
course it will be much shorter than it started out to be. The
director's skills are honed in recognizing a good
performance and knowing how to move from take one to
take two, three, four, etc. It is very important that he
elaborates on a specific idea to refine it through each take.
At the end of the day editors and directors are trying to
accomplish the same thing. Their collaborative success
comes from a deep understanding of one another; a mutual
trust and belief, that together they are creating the best
film possible.

Creative decisions made by the editor, especially at the

assembly stage, are crucial; they will largely determine if
the movie will "play." Carol Little tries to follow the
director's lead, but many decisions must be made on her
own. The parameters vary according to the director's
instructions. Many directors prefer to use the same editor in
project after project; a shorthand develops between them,
an instinctive communication.
There are times when an editor can take a bad script and
make it better, but it's very difficult to make a good script
bad. A well-written story is very difficult to turn into a bad
movie. There are times when through a good editor's vision
they can take a not-too-well-written story and make a
much better story out of it, usually by what they leave out
as opposed to as what is put in.

You also have to realize there are all kinds of work in LA:
commercials, documentaries, television films, long-format
television films, short-format, series, mini-series, features,
on and on and on.

The audience never knows what is left out, they know what
they see on the screen and how the story is told. The editor
as storyteller as a very important function that is part of
the scope of motion picture making. But he is not the most
important part of the team. He is definitely one of the team
that makes it work. A motion picture, as opposed to any
other art forms, is a team experience, not a job by one
person.
Believe it or not, living on different coasts may actually
make a big difference in how you perform as an editor.
"There are a lot of editors who work on both coasts, and I
know people who have bad feelings about it because they
have been blocked from joining either the LA local or, in my
case, the New York local. But as we begin to realize that we
can take charge, we can find a way to make it more
workable for everyone, those feelings are becoming
diffused. We've now had two years of talks with New York.
Those feelings of "us" and "them" are slowly changing to
ideas of "we" together.

The biggest difference I've found in New York, quite frankly,

is the level of serious commitment to film. I think because
the competition is fierce in New York, there are very few
jobs, and in order to survive you have to be very, very
committed. In LA, there are a number of editors who see
working with film as a great job and are not that committed
to film other than the paycheck.

You also have to realize there are all kinds of work in LA:
commercials, documentaries, television films, long-format
television films, short-format, series, mini-series, features,
on and on and on. The work is more restricted in New York.
The other difference I've found is that because New York is
a small community, it's somewhat inbred and the system of
networking is not as familiar as in LA. There's a lot of
networking and cooperation in LA because, while there is
competition, it's not quite as severe."
The editor has the most comprehensive view of the actor's
film performance. Every take is viewed, then see again and
again as the editor makes creative decisions. Even the
looping sessions, where actors have their dialogue re-
recorded to match the picture, can demonstrate certain
unique performance abilities.
Continuity is also a major consideration. Being technically
accurate can be as important as being emotional accurate.
Actors often think of the editor as the enemy, someone who
is likely to leave their best performance or their entire
performance on the cutting room floor.
The actor has to realize that editors are not sitting there
passing judgment on what they like and dislike. Editors are
their best friends, trying to do the best from them.
Unfortunately, they can't present their best work if it's
compromised by technical incompetence. Editors are an
extremely respected group of individuals, but if they are
not able to cut it, they will have to compromise, and it will
be at their expense.
Editors are often asked to compensate for an actor's
performance problems. "You can save a bad performance
by pacing a part of his dialogue on his back or on the
cutaways to other actors. Since editors see every mistake
and are often frustrated with the actor's work, it's always
interesting when they are impressed by a performance,"
states editor Bill Reynolds.

Editors often say that they are the "first audience" to see a
film. The audience remains uppermost in mind as they go
about their task of trying to tell the story in the clearest,
most cohesive and visual manner. Perhaps the single
greatest concern among today's editors is that they are
required to accomplish this at an increasingly rapid rate.

The editor needs to have a rigorous discipline, to know why

you're doing the picture; it's about sensitivity and
selectivity

The editor must assemble the film in ten to fourteen days

after the production wraps. So much film, so little time.
During the next eight or ten weeks, the director and editor
work closely together to shape the film onto its next
incarnation, the director's cut. How close this version is to
what is released will depend on the degree of the director's
clout with the studio as well as other contractual
obligations.
At every stage of the editing process, it is the editor's
responsibility to help make the story clear to the audience.
This is accomplished through the use of a visual language.
Since the best editing often goes unnoticed by the
audience, the editor's manipulation of images is vital but
somewhat invisible.

Timing is a big part of it; it has to do with musicality. The

timing of a piece of music, the timing of a language, how it
flows, how it goes from one moment to the next. The
speech patterns of an actor have their own rhythm and
musicality.
The editor needs to have a rigorous discipline, to know why
you're doing the picture; it's about sensitivity and
selectivity. Since the visual language of editing is mostly
invisible, is it possible to ascertain the editor's contribution
when seeing the final product? Sometimes the genre or
subject matter of the film will help determine the
appropriate editing style.
Finally, there are those scenes that the editor must "save"
if the film is going to work at all. These often result from
problems encountered during filming or decisions made in
postproduction.
Postproduction film editing follows a series of stages similar
to videotape editing, from preliminary editing that includes
viewing a copy of the originally recorded images, called the
work print, rushes, or dailies and selecting and ordering
specific shots and scenes, called rough cutting, to final
editing, called conforming.
Unlike videotape editing, film is spliced mechanically. Film
images can, however, also e transmitted to videotape so
that they can be edited electronically. Carol Littleton feels
however that it doesn't really matter what you edit on.
They are just tools (KEM, Moviloa, etc).
The choice between electronic and mechanical editing
techniques is a simple decision in some areas and is more
complex in others. Film editing can seem quite laborious
and time-consuming, but this is not always the case.
For example, it is much simpler to shorten or lengthen an
entire film by a few frames during preliminary film editing.
A film editor has a great deal of freedom to experiment
with a variety of different takes and shot sequences and
duration's at all stages of the editing process.

A copy made from the originally recorded film is called a

work print. The film director usually specifies which camera
takes should be printed during production. The editor,
director and producer view each day's work print in order to
evaluate how well things are going.

all shots to be made at one location are recorded at the

same time, regardless of when they occur in the script, the
editor must assemble the shots into the order specified by
the script

After viewing and approving the footage, the editor

catalogues it before beginning a rough cut. An editor will
often view the dailies over and over again to get a feel for
the production and to stimulate ideas about how images
can and should be combined.
The next stage of preliminary editing is to assemble the
individual shots into sequential order. Since films are often
shot out of continuity, that is, all shots to be made at one
location are recorded at the same time, regardless of when
they occur in the script, the editor must assemble the shots
into the order specified by the script. During the assemble
stage of editing; the entire shot is left intact.

As the rough cut progresses and each shot is placed in its

proper sequential order, the editor gradually refines the
cuts, cutting out all extraneous or unnecessary material.
Unused shots are called outtakes. They are often left on the
original camera rolls.
The pieces removed from the shots that are actually used
are called trims. They are frequently stored on the pegs of
a trim bin, which is placed near the editing bench. Trims
are sometimes spliced back into the film after the editor
has tried a specific cut, usually because the cut does not
work quite as well as was anticipated.
The editor must be careful to remove equivalent amounts
of picture and sound when trimming a shot, or the film and
sound will no longer be in perfect synchronization. If four
frames of picture are removed, four frames of sound must
be removed. However, an editor can manipulate the sound
track to advantage without completely losing sync.
For example, the sound from one shot can be overlapped
with the picture of a subsequent shot. The sound
accompanying the subsequent shot is spliced into the
sound in midshot after trimming off a portion of its
beginning equivalent in length to the overlap from the
previous shot.

In film editing, preliminary editing takes the form of rough

cutting and tape splicing the work print. Once the film
editing decisions have been finalized, the original film is
conformed to the edited work print. All of the shots from
the originally recorded film are permanently spliced into
two or more rolls, called A and B (and C and so on) rolls,
using a cement splicer which physically welds two
overlapping pieces of film together.

In a digital editing room, conforming is the process of

assembling a work print to math a sequence in the digital
editing system. When you reach the point when you want
to screen the movie on film, the conforming stage begins.

Digital editing systems provide instantaneous access to

every frame of a movie, the ability to simultaneously share
the same material on multiple workstations

Digital editing systems do not physically cut movies, people

do. Cut lists are the maps that we use to link the digital
world to the film world. Film cut lists are utilized for
conforming the work picture, cutting the negative, and
ordering the opticals. Generating cut lists is fairly simple
and does not take much time. Learning how to make them
properly does take time.

The revolution in digital editing has changed the way in

which we edit movies today. Digital editing systems provide
instantaneous access to every frame of a movie, the ability
to simultaneously share the same material on multiple
workstations, and the ability to preview simple to complex
opticals. None of these changes have eliminated the film
editing room. As long as movies are released on film, we
will continue to shoot and edit movies on celluloid.

Film dailies still have to be synced and screened each day.

The footage has to be logged and coded, boxed and
organized, and screened and cleaned. Unless celluloid is
completely eliminated from the filmmaking process the
protocol for organizing film dailies will remain unchanged.
After the lab processes the negative film and prints the
takes, the dailies are generally broken down into 1000-foot
roles and the takes are logged into a codebook. Next, the
film dailies are digitized and organized in a digital program
(ex. Avid).
The picture and track are then synced, the codebook is
entered into the digital database and the dailies are then
sent to the telecine department. Telecine is the process of
transferring film to video. Setting up telecine is one of the
first and most important responsibilities on a digital show.
The telecine house is responsible for syncing the audio. In
most cases, the editorial department syncs the picture and
track before the telecine process. After this process is
completed the daily is now ready to be screened. This
entire process occurs, believe it or not, on a daily bases
(hence the name "the dailies") throughout the production
of the film.

The truth that by the time the script appears on the screen,
it is a product of the collaborative effort of writers,
producers, directors, actors, cinematographers, editors,
composers, and others who have labored for years to bring
it to life. Feature filmmaking has become a collaborative
art, a unique synthesis of artistic vision married to an
unwieldy commercial marketplace populated by a volatile
and fickle audience.

it can never be stated enough that the feature editor must

find "truth" in the fictional work in order to make an
emotionally rich film- although, as most editors admit, they
can only work with the material (good or bad) that the
director and cinematographer give them

Editor Carol Littleton (Grand Canyon, Body Heat) sees a

similarity between her job and that of a musician. Dialogue,
visuals, story all has rhythm. It's the editor's job to pick up
on those rhythms that are internal in the scene and to
make them play.
Like the musician, you're going over the same material
again and again, finding the nuances, making the slight
changes, working on it until you feel you've extracted the
best technical interpretation and emotional tone. "My job is
to enhance the writing and to make sure that everything is
clear in the final version. I decide what to include and how
much focus to give it. I think that writing and editing are
very closely related. Both jobs are more monastic than
social." Once again, like the writer, the editor labors alone
in a room, a solitary world.
There is no common pattern for how long it takes to
become an editor. Aside from the personality required for
the job, everyone must master the tools of the trade. It can
never be stated enough that the feature editor must find
"truth" in the fictional work in order to make an emotionally
rich film- although, as most editors admit, they can only
work with the material (good or bad) that the director and
cinematographer give them.
Making movies is telling a story in its simplest form. Film is
simply telling a story. Simplicity is key. And I think that
probably is the best advice for any editor. Just simplify one
story to create pure life and emotion. In fact, editing is a
lot like writing. You are rewriting a film. You have a script
but you're rewriting a script with a film. It's not like editing
in publishing. It is not a matter of omitting and corrections.
It's very different. I think. You become a writer, but you're
writing with images, you're writing with music, you're
writing with performances, you're writing with all these
things-intangible things as well- that make an emotional
event. (Carol Littleton)

Editing is just another part of making a film. This years hit

is next years memory. Very few films become classics and
they were usually too unique to be "popular" at the time
they were released. "I feel I exert a certain influence on it.
I don't control it. I just influence it. I hope that I could work
in a climate of trust where the director feels he would be
able to use my ideas, my feelings about the material, the
criticisms, the praise, all for the good of the movie. Our job
is to interpret and respect the material at hand. Certainly
respect the style, performances, composition, writing,
lighting, every aspect. We are a very respectful lot."

FilmMakers recommendations
ACTION CUT - This is the most unique series of learning
tools in the film industry that provides an in-depth look
inside the directing craft on a step-by-step, shot-by-shot
professional level of production from the written page
through the moviemaking process to the final film.
Littleton, Carol. Film as all the Arts. ©1992
The Moving Image: Production Principles and Practices by
Gorham Anders Kindem
First Cut: Conversations With Film Editors by Gabriella
Oldham
On Film Editing: An Introduction to the Art of Film
Construction by Edward Dmytryk
The Cinema of Oliver Stone by Norman Kagan
Directing the Film: Film Directors on Their Art by Eric
Sherman
When the Shooting Stops, the Cutting Begins: A Film
Editor's Story by Ralph Rosenblum, Robert Karen Ph.D.
From Script to Screen : The Collaborative Art of Filmmaking
by Linda Seger, Edward Jay Whetmore
Making Documentary Films and Reality Videos: A Practical
Guide to Planning, Filming, and Editing Documentaries of
Real Events by Barry Hampe
In the Blink of an Eye: A Perspective on Film Editing by
Walter Murch, Francis Ford Coppola
The Avid Digital Editing Room Handbook by Tony Solomons
The Conversations: Walter Murch and the Art of Editing
Film by Michael Ondaatje
The Visual Story: Seeing the Structure of Film, TV and New
Media by Bruce A. Block
Technique of Film Editing by Karel Reisz, Gavin Millar
Technique of Film and Video Editing: History, Theory, and
Practice by Ken Dancyger
Final Cut Pro 3 and the Art of Filmmaking by Jason
Cranford Teague, David Teague
Video Editing with Avid: Media Composer, Symphony,
Xpress by Roger Shufflebottom
The Film Editing Room Handbook: How to Manage the Near
Chaos of the Cutting Room by Norman Hollyn
http://www.editing.com