The beauty of filmmaking truly happens when editing isn't just the step where all of the errors on set are now your responsibility to piece together. When a director can just properly get the shot so you have the right material to work with to make things like this happen, it's so fantastic.
Even when I closed my eyes as in the theatre as she took her finger off, the sound editing was so good that I still felt her cutting it off. I couldn't hold it anymore and when I opened my eyes, the scene cuts to the payoff, which I tried so desperately to ignore LOL. I felt everything. I love and hate it, and I think that's the effect the director and editors wanted the audience to experience. This was a great episode, thanks so much for doing it!!
Me adding a 6 second shot to my rough cut My editing professor: "6 seconds? This ain't 1952 buddy, its too slow. It needs to be faster, more cuts, more B-rolls, MORE B-ROLLS!!!" He would get a heart attack after watching this.
The finger getting cut off is an amazing scene. Staying on her face longer then we’re used to to the point where you think we might not see the finger but BAM. There it is. Also staying j the actor’s face letting them ACT.
Not cutting is one thing, not moving the camera to get a perfect framing of the scene is something else. Yasujiro Ozu was the master of the static framing. He did it back in the day (1940s, 1950s).
Did I miss a spoiler alert? I'm glad I didn't see this before seeing the film at the cinema. This video reveals significant acts in the film which evoke changes in the viewers' understanding and emotions through all three stories.
I like the frame narrative concept in this film, these are usually tough stories to edit because these edits call for the highest degree of psychological awareness of the editor in relation to what the audience needs to feel from the director's perspective of course. Great stuff!
Always impressive guests! I usually haven't heard of them but knowing they are behind such masterpieces, immediately get the idea. Nice one, Hayden! 🍿🎬
I LOVE the discussion about the "expansion of time" by going out (in concentric circles thematically) and returning and how it amplifies the theme. Sounds like an expanded version of thematical montage a la Sergei Einsenstein - but instead of shots, it's sequences. Same idea anyway - maybe it's ALL owed to Eisenstein.
Having recently watched a series made for Disney... where there is so much that is implied but never said, but done badly, watching some of these clips really highlights how much information can be conveyed without words... and simply through visual story telling & editing
"...let the code of the scene be transmitted". This statement kinda blew my mind a bit. He's thinking about the 'product' in different way, a better way. Imbuing it with agency almost. Thank you for this video.
This just proves to how subjective the art of filmmaking can be. This is great but you can also have multiple cuts in the same scene and turn it into a stunning piece of artwork. Just because we are so used to cuts in even low production films, this feels different and unique
What a coup having Lanthimos' editor and great piece! However I feel you needed to put it into context a bit more: you need a script like this one and a director like Lanthimos before editing like this - for example, that finger shot is sooo typical of Lanthimos - he teases the viewer into expecting the character will somehow get out of their predicament (like in most genre movies) and then a viewer won't expect they will actually see the horrible act, but for there to be a cutaway (unless it's a gore film) - Lanthimos then does the exact opposite and shows it in a graphic, but plain, unadorned way, with sparse, paired-down music and a lack of theatrics. Lanthimos is pretty much the only writer/director I can think of who does this, though there are probably others who also use a minimalist approach (Michael Haneke is close). It's just a defining characteristic of his style, because he is precisely doing the opposite of what other filmmakers do. I've also heard that it's really the main writer, Efthimis Filippou who defines this style more than Lanthimos himself. I love all the jumping about in time, but flashbacks are standard fare in filmmaking, it's just that here the story is so weird that it takes you aback.
I think it was IMDb that used to list the average scene length for movies. Quite a few were 5 seconds or less, which meant there had to be a lot of rapid cuts in order to drag the average down for the entire movie.
I have learnt a lot about editing with this great piece of work, thanks to our Oscar nominated editor, which is a visual representation of how a story will play out with visual information, shot by shot. It's made up of a chronological series of images, with accompanying notes, helping the filmmaker to clarify their vision. I'm from Sierra Leone 🇸🇱 West Africa, trying to lay more emphasis in filming as well as editing with mindset technical sound.
This is an amazing episode with so much to learn and feel threatened at the same time, which is incredible. Both the host and interviewer are top-notch! This is my first time commenting on a show on RU-vid. Thank you~
Many thanks for the video. It’s amazing that Dzyga Vetrov’s ideas are still alive. BTW, his pseudonym “Dzyga” translates from Ukrainian as «spinning top».
It's funny how this bell curve happens in virtually every profession, whether it's manual labor, coding, or artistic. When you're a beginner you do less (because you dont know how to do more). When you're intermediate, you do more (because you think more is better) and then when you're a master, you do less again (but this time it's because you do only what's absolutely necessary and everything else is superfluous).
most of what i have been taught is to cut cut cut keep peoples attention people have short attention spans. this is like completely the opposite of that advice so how would you take this information and apply it? just looking for others ideas and to start a conversation on the video.
I would like to differ on the show size of the first clip 3:05. That shot does not give the feeling of terror or fear in any way. It gives a feeling of something is cooking. NO feeling yet. The second shot which the frame is closer with him still on the right still makes us feel he is timid. To get fear in the shot the shot should have been wider, even wider. Take the action away from the audience. That voyeuristic looking into the crime from a distance. Then the long cut is fine. If you want to personalize the feelings of the actors with the audience then you move to Mid shot with slow trolley / dolly in to both of them. I am trying to be more objective. Now the cut will also be as per audiences. The senior audience will see differently than the younger audience. The second film gave the right feel. this was on the script level and can see it. The timing of shots are great. Great editing
I always thought that editing follows the script. So how would the director or the DP know to film the flashbacks if it's not in the script? I gotta go find that script now.
I love what you got to show here and enjoy what you have to say. Really good stuff. One note just maybe from me... but SPOILERS? LOL. I have not had a chance get to Kind of Kindness yet and wow!!! yes this sc is amazing and i'm in it.. but spoiler maybe LOL. Keep up the good stuff all in all.
Although this seems very simple, my question is, were they shooting for the edit? Was the way that the film was cut ALREADY in the filmmaker's head or was every possible (logical?) shot taken to play with in post?🤔
Those were my thoughts. In my teens through my 20s, I put myself through torture and watched films "just because" it was this or that filmmaker. This one will take a backseat for now.
