Questions for the Director

Hi,

Instead of just jumping into cutting a scene, I'd like to talk to the director about each scene and get a sense of what he wants. So what are some good questions to get a director to answer about a scene that will help the editor?

What's most important about this scene?

Having a brain fart right now so unfortunately that's all I can come up with

> So what are some good questions to get a director to answer about a scene that will help the editor?

If you ask me, I'd say that the director should drive that, not the editor. Some directors (like when I direct) like to give a briefing before editing; some directors prefer to let the editors work "raw", without any sort of preconception about the footage. I think you need to just let the director decide that, unless you don't understand the scene. Even then, a raw editor's pass can be useful. I once edited a short film where I completely misread the script, edited the scene pretty much backwards from how it was written, and the director had a coronary when she first saw the result. I promised her I'd recut that right away according to her script, but two days later she found that every single viewer of the cut loved the "wrong" way of approaching the scene. We never even tried the scripted way. That's the kind of happy accident you usually can't get if you over-talk everything before the edit.

Good directors know that it's a process. So unless the director wants them, I never go out of my way to get copious instructions beforehand. I look at the footage and cut it the way I think it's best. If the director has certain personal favourites, such as a favourite acting take, s/he can put it in after first viewing. Those particulars would usually be in the script supervisor's notes, anyway.


www.derekmok.com

My opinion is, to get this initial input from the director and go up to or maybe slightly above the 'call of duty' on those ideas, but (especially when it's not your film) be careful how much of your talent and film making ability you put into the job without specific direction or you could literally be moulding a useless director's career with your talent.

For instance my editing has previously won awards for a 'director' who had absolutely zero input in post or the edit, i was given complete control. So it's a bit disheartening to then see said 'director' in an interview putting forward creative decisions as his own when he knows damn well they were wholly the editors. The '48 Laws Of Power' have a lot to answer for and unfortunately describes the mentality of many directors. Every industry has them but reading the free pdf online '48 Laws Of Power' has helped me immeasurably (in ways of defence not utilisation) while working as an editor with clients and directors.

Many directors benefit from having an editor instinctively craft them an excellent film only to then take complete credit for the choices made by default (which is part of the system granted but IMO in the lower levels that shouldn't be happening) .IMO Sally Menke for instance should have been given far FAR more credit for the style of Tarantino's films (a case that makes itself from the clear state of Django Unchained) A good director will know how important your choices are, but don't do the job for him or her. Push for that communication to assess if you're working with an empty head.

The editor is the final director of any film. Of course this reality is usually played down by all involved in a production.

WM,

> be careful how much of your talent and film making ability you put into the job without specific direction or you could literally be moulding a useless director's
> career with your talent.

That's not a professional attitude to take.
You do your job as well as you can, regardless of the personality or perceived talent level of your collaborators. It's not your place to judge the director. That "useless director" could be the next visionary, or s/he could go nowhere. It's not your business, and it certainly shouldn't be a factor in how well you do your own job.

When a director on a project gives a lot of freedom to an editor, the editor's work is also to the credit of the director. It'd be nice if producers and directors gave credit where credit's due, but the fact is, an editor is not the commanding general; an editor is a top lieutenant. The director's wishes trump your prerogatives. A healthy creative relationship means the leader will listen to the collaborator, and sometimes things will go one way, sometimes another. It is not unreasonable at all for a director to claim some credit for excellent editing done by an editor, because the director allowed said editing work to be applied.


www.derekmok.com

I've always respected your opinion Derek, but that was just one experience I had and how I feel about it, it wasn't hollywood work, it wasn't even TV work. It was one experience and does not represent my 'attitude' to my job as an editor (maybe i should have put in a disclaimer )

My experience illustrated was while working for a truly talentless 'director' who has since gone on to do nothing. That is all, and without going from one extreme to the other I wouldn't say my contribution to this post is completely devoid of worth.

WM,

Hi WM,

I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on Sally Menke vs Fred Raskin,
Tarantino's other work vs. Django, what makes Menke's work superior?

I don't know if you saw Deathproof, which was edited by Menke but I didn't care for that film
and it's Tarantino's worst in my opinion.

Maybe a better comparison is Inglorious Bastards vs. Django?

IMO Menke's work is without a doubt superior to Raskin's in every possible way taking into account what she did for QT up to the point of her death, I'm not saying you can't have the opinion that (in your opinion) her work was better on some films than others, my only contention is that by a wide margin she was responsible for a lot of the 'style' attributed to QT's films prior the clear mess that is Django Unchained.

While there may be many editors like Raskin, Sally IMO was one of the special ones and is (clearly) not so easily replaced. By equal measure i'd propose Thelma Schoonmaker has been immeasurably important to the look, style and feel of Martin Scorsese's films. The 3rd editor i'd mention with such regard is Mary Sweeney for David Lynch.

Id be happy to continue the discussion via PMs (best not clutter a titled thread)

WM,

[ you could literally be moulding a useless director's career with your talent. ]

Oh, hell yes! All the time! They LOVE us for it. And we get paid.

- Loren

Today's FCP 7 keytips:
Copy clip Attributes with Command-C
Paste selected Attributes with Option-V
Remove selected Attributes with Command-Option-V !

Your Final Cut Studio KeyGuide™ Power Pack.
Now available at KeyGuide Central.
www.neotrondesign.com

Quote

Oh, hell yes! All the time! They LOVE us for it. And we get paid.

- Loren

Indeed! But have you not ever been gobsmacked when a 'director' has the sheer nerve to take credit for your edit-innovations and ideas right in front of your face?

Creativity is currency!?
WM,

I would immediately thank him or her for the opportunity to solve that particular problem for him. "I felt well used on that one, Chief." And it would be true. And if he or she insisted I wasn't the problem solver rather than graciously retire to director role, that director has me for one film.

And then I'll include the real story in my memoirs, later in in life.

My mentor (or closest to one) Ralph Rosenblum did that. I like his excoriation of early Mel Brooks and early William Friedkin, both brats.

- Loren

Today's FCP 7 keytips:
Copy clip Attributes with Command-C
Paste selected Attributes with Option-V
Remove selected Attributes with Command-Option-V !

Your Final Cut Studio KeyGuide™ Power Pack.
Now available at KeyGuide Central.
www.neotrondesign.com