2

Mastering the Art of Film Editing

► Heart of the Matter

The editor has propriety over a realm that belongs to no one else in the filmmaking process. While the cinematographer has her lights and lenses, the costume designer his clothing, and the production designer her sets, only the editor bears the responsibility for the pace and rhythm of the film. And that, as much as anything, influences the outcome of the movie. It is the beating heart of the medium.

That may sound like a rash assessment. It is not as intuitive, perhaps, as our perception of what is said or how it is said. Yet when it is said, and for how long, including pauses, glances, breaths, and reactions, fuels the emotional subtext of the film.

How is this achieved? Pace and rhythm are certainly more elusive elements than the concrete aspects of set construction, wardrobe design, and other material essentials. Though pace and rhythm remain less tangible than these other elements, they, like music, pull on our heartstrings to an extraordinary degree. The mode for achieving these feelings is as simple as this: a cut. With a simple pair of scissors, a splicer, or a virtual click, the editor makes a cut. Ultimately, that is all he has to work with. And it means everything to the life of a film.

► The Scalpel

When the editor views the footage that was shot the day before, he is watching a collection of scenes and takes. Scenes consist of particular angles containing all or some of the scripted dialogue and action. Each attempt to record it counts as a take. The scene and takes, such as Scene 45 Take 3, comprise the coverage. How a scene is covered allows an editor to transition smoothly from wide shots to medium shots to close-ups without interrupting the narrative flow. During production, all or part of the dialogue and action in a scene is repeated from different camera positions. It is up to the editor to decide which camera position, or angle, best serves the meaning of the scene at that moment.

Does the editor employ a close-up for intensity or a wide shot for orientation? Does she link two characters through an over-the-shoulder shot or isolate them with singles? Every time an editor makes a cut, she must make three basic decisions. She must select which is the best piece of footage to use. She must determine how long it will remain on the screen. And she must decide where to place it in relation to the other pieces. Selection—Length—Juxtaposition: the Editing Triangle (Figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1 The editing triangle

► Why Edit?

The fact that this book exists posits an assumption: that the ability to edit images and sounds is a key—if not primary—requirement of filmmaking. Yet why edit? Plenty of talented directors and cinematographers can mount beautiful shots that tell the story without a cut among them (see Rope, 1948). And they can procure from their actors stunning, emotional performances. So what is the need to fracture these images and performances through editing? A multitude of factors answer this question. The great director/editor Akira Kurosawa (Seven Samurai, Rashomon, The Hidden Fortress) believed that there was the film that was shot and then there was the film that was made in the editing room. The edited film was the one that ultimately mattered. In a sense, the purpose of this book is to answer the question “Why edit?” Here are some basic points.

The first is the one that differentiates film from its relatives in theater. By breaking a story into hundreds or thousands of individual moments, as opposed to a continuous performance within the confines of a proscenium, the editor takes control of time. The great director Sergei Eisenstein realized early in the history of cinema that the length and placement of shots directly affect the audience’s experience of time.

Another reason is the editor’s ability to affect performance. This pertains not only to dialogue, where an editor having selected a particular line reading can further alter its impact by adding or removing pauses, but also to the opportunities to include or exclude reactions, movements, and facial expressions.

Another advantage of editing comes from the ability to influence the film’s pace and rhythm. This ability, which is exclusive to the editing process, relies on all elements of the Editing Triangle (selection, length, and juxtaposition). An entire chapter is devoted to this important distinction (Chapter 15).

And lastly, editing allows for the creation of meaning that is particular to cinema. The placement of shots in relation to each other builds meaning in a manner unsurpassed by other mediums. To better understand that, it is informative to look at the game-changing experiment of the early filmmaker and theorist, Lev Kuleshov.

The Great Experiment of Dr. Kuleshov

What constitutes a cut has been the central concern of editors since the beginning of narrative filmmaking, in particular with the Russian filmmakers. In 1922, filmmaker and theorist Lev Kuleshov discovered the analytical model for film editing. He was not a doctor, but he might as well have been. Kuleshov believed so firmly in the power of montage that he felt it “overrode all other aspects of filmmaking.”¹ His approach directly influenced the great Soviet directors Sergei Eisenstein (1898–1948), Vsevolod Pudovkin (1893–1953), and Dziga Vertov (1896–1954), who in turn influenced the future of world cinema with such groundbreaking films as Battleship Potemkin (1925), Mother (1926), and Man With a Movie Camera (1929).

In a brilliant experiment, Kuleshov solved the riddle of montage. It is a test that is sometimes attributed to Hitchcock, since he tried it once, even though the actual experiment occurred many years before his prominence.

To accomplish his experiment, Kuleshov collected random film clips from previously shot—and completely unrelated—footage. Then he asked the popular matinee idol of the time, Ivan Mozzhukhin, to perch in front of his camera and make no response as he gazed into the lens. Mozzhukhin had no idea how the director/editor would incorporate the image. After the film was processed, Kuleshov spliced the shot of Mozzhukhin’s face next to the other images he had previously collected. When Kuleshov placed a shot of a bowl of soup after the image of the actor’s face, he achieved a different meaning than when he placed the image of a child’s coffin or of a pretty girl next to the actor.

In the first case, the audience interpreted the scene as meaning that Mozzhukhin felt hungry. In the second instance, the audience experienced sadness over the grief Mozzhukhin exhibited for the dead child. In the third, the audience saw the stirrings of desire in the actor’s eyes. At the time, the great Russian director Vsevolod Pudovkin commented that the audience “raved about the acting… . But we knew that in all three cases the face was exactly the same.”² The viewer had unknowingly supplied the emotional connection in his own mind.

To Kuleshov this revealed the basic premise of film editing—connecting neutral, seemingly unrelated images can liberate a new and deeper meaning. This meaning, and its ensuing emotions, far exceeds the value of the individual shot. That is the power of film editing.

Figure 2.2 shows an approximation of Kuleshov’s experiment. In the first shot, you see a neutral image of Mozzhukhin, then an image of a bowl of soup, then the same shot of Mozzhukhin repeated, then a coffin, then the same shot of Mozzhukhin, and then a pretty girl. These are the same subjects Kuleshov chose to intercut with shots of his actor. If you look back and forth between the images, you’ll get a sense of what the Russian audience experienced when viewing the film.

Figure 2.2 The Kuleshov effect

Photo credits: Public domain, author, U.S. Air Force/Staff Sgt. Daniel DeCook, and Scott Brock

► Dynamic and Continuity Editing

Editing falls into two main categories: dynamic and continuity. Continuity editing is generally used in feature films and dramatic television. In general, this approach belongs to productions where scenes can be covered from multiple angles repeating the same action and dialogue, thereby creating a consistency of time and space. Dynamic editing, on the other hand, often works in documentaries and music videos. In dynamic editing, concepts of matching and continuity rarely apply. Shots are ordered by meaning but not necessarily by their relationship to one another in time or space. A documentary filmmaker photographing a leopard taking down a gazelle does not have the luxury of asking for a retake or another angle. Generally, he only gets one shot at one angle. Because of this, he will need to string together discontinuous images to create meaning and tell his story.

Checking the Pulse

The cellular phone has introduced a new form of communication to the world. Texting, like film editing, is generally most effective with a one idea at a time. In well-paced editing, each image serves a single purpose and then gives way to the next. The analogy can be seen in a well-paced text conversation, where each text bubble refers to single idea. Like editing, rapid texting tends to avoid excessive lead in or lead out (Figure 2.3).

Figure 2.3 A texting sequence

Though various rules apply to all aspects of editing, continuity editing generally makes greater demands—such as the requirement to match action—than dynamic editing. In recent years, however, the lines between these two approaches have blurred as documentaries and music videos borrow techniques from feature films (think of the re-creations in many National Geographic documentaries) and feature films borrow techniques from documentaries, music videos, and video games—consider Deepwater Horizon (2016), The Matrix (1999), or Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (2010), for example.

► The Rules

Here are some basic rules of editing.

Match Action

In matching action the editor knits one shot to the next. This maintains a sense of reality and flow. A jump in action or jump cut (common in dynamic editing) tends to disrupt the flow. By covering a scene from multiple angles, the director creates the opportunity to emphasize various aspects of character, action, and object throughout the scene. In order to weave these varied views into a seamless whole, the director repeats the action and dialogue again and again with each take at each angle. When cutting from a close-up of a woman raising a drink to her lips to a wider shot that includes her and a man entering in the background, her action begins in one shot and is completed in the next shot. This gives the illusion of continuous movement (i.e. raising a glass) even though it has been interrupted by a splice. By employing this technique, an editor can focus on a particular action one moment while widening the field to include additional information the next, all without interrupting the narrative flow.

Cut on Action

Just as a magician conceals the mechanism of a trick by distracting his audience with a sudden hand movement, an editor can improve the trick of continuous movement by cutting on action. Our eyes naturally follow movement: tracking an animal in the wild, spotting a thrown object, or locating a stealthy predator. This survival instinct remains hardwired in the human psyche. An awareness of its function helps an editor make more effective cuts. An actor’s or an object’s movements tend to draw our eyes—and therefore our attention. This helps to disguise a cut, making it more fluid. Static images, on the other hand, tend to make a cut more obvious. Where possible, cut on action.

Let the Camera Settle Before Cutting

Another rule, however, suggests that we shouldn’t cut on camera movement. Let the camera settle before making the cut. For example, begin with the camera steady, then let it move and finally settle again. This gives a sense of completeness and allows the audience to anticipate the transition to the next image.

Create Visual Bridges

The discussion of action leads to another important concept: visual dominance. The term derives from the Colavita effect, which describes our underlying bias toward visual stimuli. In experiments where observers were bombarded with auditory and visual stimuli, they tended to respond primarily to the visual signals. In film, as well, audio remains subservient to the video image. Within the video image it is important to discriminate between essential and inessential information. Good directors and art directors fill the frame with compelling visuals, but only particular objects and characters are emphasized.

When you watch a film, pay attention to where objects and actors reside in the frame. The important ones should be visually dominant. They catch your attention. In doing so, they draw the eye to a particular portion of the frame. When the editor selects a shot, he must determine where the viewer’s attention will fall within that frame. To help create a seamless cut, he needs to ensure that the next shot picks up at approximately the same point in the frame where the previous shot left off. Otherwise an unintended jump occurs. The jump registers when the eye must leap from one part of the frame in the first shot to the opposite area in the next. Figure 2.4 illustrates how the problem is solved by introducing a visual bridge—an interim shot that moves the eye from one side of the frame to the other.

Figure 2.4 A visual bridge

Don’t Cross the Line

Since film takes place on a two-dimensional plane, it is important to maintain screen direction. In this way the audience remains properly oriented in terms of movement and eyelines. This is accomplished by respecting the 180-degree rule. The rule states that all action must take place within an imaginary 180-degree arc. Anything on the other side of that arc is considered “crossing the line” and will disorient the viewer. If you have coverage that takes place on both sides of the action line, it is important to place a neutral shot (one where scene direction isn’t obvious) between a shot on one side of the line and a shot on the other side. Figure 2.5 illustrates this concept.

Figure 2.5 The 180-degree rule

Maintain Eyelines

A corollary of the 180-degree rule resides in the need to maintain eyelines. Few cuts are more disorienting than those where two characters converse face to face and, rather than looking at each other, appear to stare past each other. In many cases the editor is at the whim of the director and director of photography (DP) who have supplied the shots. Generally, if Character A is on the left side of the frame and looking right, then Character B should be on the right side of the frame looking the left. When eyelines don’t match, the editor can sometimes alleviate the problem by repositioning the frame or, in some cases, flopping the shot (i.e. reversing the east–west orientation of the image).

Vary the Cuts

As becomes apparent when viewing Hitchcock’s Rope, if we stay on a shot too long, it tends to dissipate the energy of the scene. For this reason, Hitchcock continuously moved the camera in order to change angles and emphasize important details. Editing mimics these camera moves and acts as a pointer, directing the audience’s attention to the most important elements in the scene, moment by moment. Therefore, the editor should consider incorporating a variety of angles when composing a scene.

Cuts Should Be Motivated

This is a corollary to the previous rule. In choosing a variety of shots with which to build a scene, an editor should avoid arbitrary selection. Each cut should be motivated by the one before it. For instance, if in the first shot the actor points at an object, then it follows that the next shot would be a view of that object. Unfortunately, this is not always as obvious as it sounds, particularly when cutting dialogue. Shots contain subtext as well as specific information. In The Graduate (1967; see Chapter 15) the editor selected 2-shots and wide shots that emphasized the gulf between Mrs. Robinson (Anne Bancroft) and Benjamin Braddock (Dustin Hoffman) before moving into tighter coverage as their intimacy grows.

Allow Clean Entrances and Exits

Another common editing practice requires objects and people to enter the frame from off-camera. When leaving a shot, they should completely clear the frame. This notion avoids the potentially jarring effect created by cutting to a moving object—such as people walking or cars speeding by—when they are already in the frame. It also avoids a false connection of a character leaving one scene and arriving in another.

Pay Attention to Physical Continuity

Perhaps you have seen movies where in one angle the actor holds a cup of coffee in her left hand, then on a cut to another angle the cup has mysteriously shifted to the right hand or maybe disappeared completely. These are continuity errors. The script supervisor on the set and the editor in the editing room need to pay attention to continuity. A breakdown in continuity can damage the pretense of reality that a film seeks to create.

Respect the Rule of Three

In life a balancing factor exerts itself on many aspects of behavior. Events often occur in sets of three. In the news, when two prominent people die within days of each other, the anticipation arises that a third will soon follow. Despite its disturbing implications, this notion reflects the psychological affinity for symmetry. A fulcrum with a counterbalance on each side, the Rule of Three applies to many aspects of aesthetics. Take Shakespeare’s famous “Friends, Romans, Countrymen …” or France’s tripartite motto “Liberté, égalité, fraternité.” Or, in our case, the Editing Triangle—“selection, length, and juxtaposition.” Some equate it to the ease of remembering three items. In constructing a scene or a film, it becomes vital to pay attention to the primacy of three.

In a sense the editor’s work amounts to proving a point, and the editor should provide his proofs in parcels of three, whether they occur within a joke—with its setup, elaboration, and pay-off—or a threat that, repeated twice, is finally carried out in the third instance. This symmetry also helps construct sequences of shots. For instance, an explosion can be dissected into three shots, each growing in wider profusion, to give greater impact. Likewise, in composition, a corollary exists called the Rule of Thirds. This suggests that the subject should reside within a third of the frame, rather than in the center, to produce a more compelling image. For symmetry, memory, and proof, remember the Rule of Three.

Such are the basic rules of film editing. Simple enough to outline, not always easy to follow. And, as we’ll see in subsequent chapters, sometimes it is best to completely disregard them.