Legendary Editor, Dede Allen
“The editor is the final author of the film” – David Lean
From the earliest days of making movies there has been misunderstanding and confusion about what exactly an editor does in the creation of a movie, television program or today, the multitude of other types of “dynamic media” that are emerging both scripted and unscripted. This is understandable because along with the cinematographer, the art and craft of the film editor is relatively new and one which never existed before the advent of motion pictures. My purpose here is to clarify this confusion at a fundamental level.
With the exception of the director, producer and writer* the editor is the person closest to, and most intimately involved in the actual creation of the final version of the project which is ultimately released to the public.
Now, this is true to varying degrees in different forms of dynamic media. A live event for example, is edited “on-the-fly”, or as the action occurs by a director who calls the shots (edits) in real-time by choosing from a variety of different camera angles or viewpoints that are photographing the event. This is also the case with much of live television, although often, a show will be taped and “roughed out” by a director as it occurs, and then later edited for length, rhythm, timing and other creative or technical issues.
Often, there is the misconception that the editor is strictly a technician, pushing buttons to accommodate the wishes of the director or producer. While occasionally so, in the majority of situations, this is not the case. Yes, there are technical and complex aspects of the craft, but I think it is safe to say that the craft of the cinematographer, for example, with its angles, lenses, lighting, etc, requires a much greater depth of technical, even scientific knowledge to successfully accomplish the work.
But on a long-format feature film, documentary, single-camera television program, web series or anything else with a narrative, it is the editor, along with the producers and/or director that work on the project for the longest period of time, get to know the material shot by the production crew most thoroughly, and make both creative and technical decisions for the best course to take on each particular shot, scene and ultimately complete film until the project is considered finished.**
Next in this series: The Day to Day Job Functions of the Editor.
* There are many type of producers, directors and writers. Some are passionately involved from start to finish. Others take a more “hands off” approach.
** The famous director John Ford is quoted as saying that “films are never finished, they’re simply abandoned”.
[...] What a Film Editor Does: Setting the Record Straight [...]
Just some random thoughts to offer:) The very word “edit” implies to the layman that editors simply remove things. This misconception was also exacerbated by decades of network television showing theatrical movies that began with the disclaimer, “Edited for Television.” I always try to sum up in a sentence to friends who have no idea what editors do by first telling them to imagine the job of a newspaper or magazine editor. This doesn’t explain much at all, but it starts a perception of us as a commanding position. The great injustice in the industry is that the actors, the director, the producer, the writer and the composer all share in residuals; but not the editor. I applaud what you’re doing. Only until the craft of editing is understood will the curtain we’re behind perhaps open a little.
True. If I had a dollar for every time someone said to me, “Oh yea, your the guy who cuts out the bad parts” after I told them I was a film editor I be rich! Lol, if it were only that simple.
I also think your comments about residuals are spot on. As world economic models continue to evolve and adjust to technological breakthroughs, this kind of compensation is something that should be brought back to the negotiating table.
The craft and expertise we bring to a project often results not just in meaningful work that in a best case scenario enriches peoples lives, but also in massive profits for the multinationals that produce them. Considering, the hours we put in and the life sacrifices we often have to make, not to mention the vagaries and increasingly volatile nature of freelancing, I think we earn the right to the small sense of security, (or performance bonus) that residuals offer.
Good job. I truly believe that film editing is the one profession in the film/tv industry that CANNOT BE TAUGHT! A cameraman can learn about lighting, lenses, etc. but an editor either ‘has it or not’. One can learn all the mechanical aspects, but an editor has to have story instincts that you can’t learn in film schools.
I agree with you to a large extent Murray. I mean, some people have two left feet and they just can’t dance. But I think that is more a function of fear and insecurity. I’ve got to believe with enough time Gene Kelly could have taught anyone to dance.
There are certainly those who are “gifted” at editing as anything else. But even for those who start from zero, if the seed is there and the person has the inclination (and good fortune) to study hard under the tutelage of a master, the skill can be developed and in time be transmitted to the student.
Well done! We have been invisible, especially to our own industry, for too long. Keep it coming…
jason
Thank you. And thanks for contributing Jason.
Great start to a series.
Union editors do earn residuals, but not for themselves. Those union productions pay into the general fund of MPEG which subsidizes a terrific health care plan. Requirements are getting tougher, but the editors of major grossing films help subsidize healthcare for all.
Some editors, who shal remain nameless but are well known, have earned points in a film for many years.
It’s all about relationships, and many loyal directors acknowledge the contribution of long term editors with some of their profit points. Sometimes it’s worth only the paper the deal memo is written on, other times, significant. Always, it is a gesture from the director or producer that the editor is indeed an important creative contributor.
Thanks Jim and thank you for making these important points.
All of the above is true – and – editors are often involved in rearranging story structure, suggesting line cuts, writing new lines of dialogue, completely changing the performance of an actor, giving music suggestions and/or notes to the composer, and overseeing the sound mix and visual effects. As such, editors routinely rise above the purely editorial aspects of editing, and dovetail into directing and producing! (all of which iswhat makes it so much fun!)
Films are written photographed produced and directed but finished
by editors
Yes! And with more and more visual effects being tweaked, adjusted and created in the cutting room, editors are becoming a greater part of production!
Exactly Sarah! And as we move into a world that will require practically everyone to become media creators as well as media consumers, I think it’s critical we draw back the curtain, as John says above, and reveal the mysteries, magic and power of what we do. Doing this will also serve as an important component in gaining the respect for our work it deserves and protecting our skill sets from commoditization.
Larry,
What a wonderful take on our contribution as editor to a film as a whole. I like the final re-write/author reference
from David Lean. I think that the editor’s best work is at interpreting the visual material to tell a compelling narrative story. Doesn’t happen too often today, but when it does it’s very special indeed. Thanks you for opening the curtain
and revealing one of the best kept secrets in the industry. Good for you!
Gib,
When I read that quote over 20 years ago I was working for Dede. When I asked her if she had ever heard it she said, “shhhh, don’t let the director hear you say that, we’ll all be up shits creek”.
Thanks for stopping by and contributing. Say hello to Jane!
Best,
Larry
Editing has, heretofore of late, been referred to as the “invisible art.” So this would make me inclined to reason that if we, as editors, do a collectively fantastic job, then no one should notice the editing in a film.
So why is it when I go out for an interview that producers ask if I can give them a reel to watch. If they notice my editing then that means I am showing them bad work. If they don’t notice the editing then it means I’ve done good work.
I don’t have a reel. It’s a waste of time.
… but, when did we become sound editors, composers and visual effects artists too?
All expected by the producers and all without pay?
Thanks for article!
1992. When digital editing infiltrated Hollywood and changed everything. Unfortunately it didn’t make us experts at all those other crafts, it just gave us the ability to do them easily and efficiently. Many producers and even directors don’t understand that. They just assume it’s part of the editors gig.
Thank you for the comment!