Posts Tagged: Post Production

The Human in the Machine Interview #3: Editor Eric Brodeur

The Human in the Machine is a continuing series of interviews with industry professionals focused on the relational aspects of the editorial process. Blog pages and bookshelves everywhere are flooded with technical information on the craft of editing, but there seems to be little out there on the human side of it all. Even though much of our work is technical based, what is at the heart of it all is spending 10-15 hours a day locked in a room, usually with other people, creating stuff. What makes those other people come back to your edit suite instead of walking down the hall to the next one? Why do so many editors and directors reference a “psychic relationship” where they instinctively know how the other would proceed with an edit? Some of my questions don’t even pertain to editing alone, but all work that involves relationships and collaboration. I think, especially in school, so much of the curriculum is geared toward the tech side instead of the human side. As much as it doesn’t seem fair, a big part of this industry is not based on raw talent and knowledge but on politics, connections, and people skills. You can either fight this truth or decide to train those muscles with the same intensity that you train your technical skill set. Hopefully each of these interviews give you a better idea of how to approach this human side of the business and how to create the work relationships that keep clients coming back for more.

 

Here is how Eric describes his road to the edit chair.

My love for film started as a young boy, sitting in an empty theater watching a final showing of the Star Wars’ re-release in southeastern Pennsylvania. Like many, it captured my imagination but I was too young to realize I could make a career of it. Decades later I left my job as a computer professional and relocated to Los Angeles. After many ups-and-downs in the film industry I discovered that picture editing was my passion; it was the perfect fit of everything I had ever done and imagined I could do. They say “timing is everything” and three years ago I got my chance to edit an independent film called Bedrooms which went on to win two Best Feature awards and recently aired on Showtime. My next project, LJE The Journey, was a Nigerian-American film which became one of Nigeria’s top grossing films of all time as well as winning awards for Best Editing and Best Feature. My current film is an urban music drama called Filly Brown and will be completed later this year.

 

Check out his work and blog at http://www.ericbrodeur.com/


GM3- what qualities do you find in the clients you work with regularly? what makes you both click?

EB- Having similar sensibilities but with a unique voice. Generally speaking we see eye-to-eye on things both in, and out of, the edit suite. That’s not to say we don’t argue about a scene. Overall there is a large amount of trust.

GM3- when working with a new client how do you go about fostering a good working relationship with them?

EB- I ask a lot of questions to get inside their head and understand their project, who they are as creatives and what goal they are aiming for. I will ask the same questions different ways to assess their consistency. I keep going until the answers don’t change.

A new client looks for confidence in their post-production team. They want me to “just handle it,” plan ahead, avoid surprises.

From a creative perspective I choose my battles but if I don’t agree with something, I explain my position. Often I will try their suggestion and contrast it with my own.

GM3- how do you “sell” a cut? what are your methods for communicating your intent or purpose of an editorial decision?

It comes down to creative or technical. Technical is usually a no-brainer: soft focus, poor framing, too shaky. On the creative side it’s about the emotion we are trying to evoke in the audience. Does the cut achieve it?

There is that in-between category…the craft of editing. You know, those “best practices” like not crossing the line, cutting on action, pre-lapping dialogue, etc.

When it comes to “selling your cut” I think the circumstances dictate the action taken. A director who understands the editorial process shouldn’t be asking for “another two frames off the tail.” There is a time and place for that but they should be focused on the characters and the story. Are we hitting the right beats? Is that the right performance? How do we feel about our character?

I defend cuts as needed and with an explanation. It doesn’t hurt to have alternate versions and show them in a way which promotes your desired cut. Although this is a collaborative process, it’s the director’s film and they have final say.

GM3- what should an editor know about the director/client and his personality that would help the working relationship?

EB- The more time you can spend outside of the edit suite, the better. Have lunch and talk about movies, documentaries, your favorite restaurants, kids, the latest Apple product, whatever. If you’re wondering about things like micro-managing, tantrums, etc., you can ask around and find other editors more than happy to share stories.

I feel it’s my job to be accommodating because you can’t get along perfectly with everyone. Accommodating doesn’t mean push-over. It’s important to be assertive but respect that, ultimately, this is the director/producer’s project. Once it’s over the choice is mine to work with them again.

GM3- how do you combat the “button-pusher” syndrome where a client is micromanaging every aspect of the edit and not incorporating you as a collaborator?

In dealing with the “button pusher” syndrome the best solution is having a conversation about it. Some directors are perfectionists and can’t help themselves. Others just don’t know how to communicate their thoughts. Those who are abusive…just walk away.

The project may also determine how to handle this. If you’re editing an indie film for ultra-low pay, it’s probably not worth it. But cutting a high-profile film which may further your career…it may be worth putting up with.

It’s important to have a goal and not let little things like this get in the way.

GM3- In managing a trouble client where the relationship has gone wrong, what types of things can you do to right the ship and bring a positive nature back to the relationship instead of just weather the storm?

EB- It’s not just the client but everyone on your team. It’s important to be proactive and avoid disasters. If I have a question or concern I put it out there for discussion. If I’m unsure how a colleague feels, I’ll ask. Not everyone will be honest in their response but reaching out is what matters most.

Some people suggest “just walk away” but it depends on the situation. I ask myself “have I honestly done everything in my power to resolve this?” Fortunately I haven’t had to do this.

GM3- How do separate your edit suite and sessions from all the other ones out here? How do you keep the clients coming back to you and your edit experience?

EB- When it comes to differentiation it’s easy to think about a particular style of cutting. That’s only a piece of it. You differentiate by being easy to work with. Check your ego. Understand people’s needs and address them. Keep cool under pressure. Solve problems. Plan ahead. Get the job done without complaint or gossip. Be nice. Have fun.

You may get hired for your trendy cutting style but you’ll get re-hired because you are agreeable and play well with others.

GM3- How do you manage a session where you have multiple clients in the suite and the decision by committee syndrome is kicking in?

EB- I consider these to be brainstorming sessions. Something isn’t working so let’s get other viewpoints. What stands out are good ideas or something we haven’t tried yet…not “nudge this 4 frames that way” or some other mechanical suggestion.

It’s important to defer to your next-in-charge…the director. Let her slug it out with other people in the room. My job is to maintain sanity and control but not necessarily lead the group. It’s important to remember whose project this is and who is ultimately responsible for it.

The Human in the Machine Interview #2: Editor Agustin Rexach

The Human in the Machine is a continuing series of interviews with industry professionals focused on the relational aspects of the editorial process. Blog pages and bookshelves everywhere are flooded with technical information on the craft of editing, but there seems to be little out there on the human side of it all. Even though much of our work is technical based, what is at the heart of it all is spending 10-15 hours a day locked in a room, usually with other people, creating stuff. What makes those other people come back to your edit suite instead of walking down the hall to the next one? What keeps those other people from killing you, or what keeps you from killing them? Why do so many editors and directors reference a “psychic relationship” where they instinctively know how the other would proceed with an edit? Some of my questions don’t even pertain to editing alone, but all work that involves relationships and collaboration. I think, especially in school, so much of the curriculum is geared toward the tech side instead of the human side. Unfortunately, I know too many great guys who are wicked machine operators but fall short in the client-relations category. They can soak up tutorials and spit out phenomenal work but you put a client over their shoulder who they have to entertain for the day and they’ll keel over. Even though it doesn’t seem fair, a big part of this industry is not based on raw talent and knowledge but on politics, connections, and people skills. You can either fight this truth or decide to train those muscles with the same intensity that you train your technical skill set. Hopefully each of these interviews give you a better idea of how to approach this human side of the business and how to create the work relationships that keep clients coming back for more.

If you haven’t read it yet, check out the first interview with Director David Smith. In this latest one I got to chat with Editor and friend, Agustin Rexach. I met him through the wonderful world of twitter as @ECedit and his generosity in sharing time and knowledge over the last year or so has been staggering, especially in the support he gave when I made the big move out to Colorado. He is the epitome of the act of paying it forward, and inspires me in that regard. His responses to my questions below are yet another example of how he goes above and beyond; there is so much gold in his perspective on the craft. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.

Agustin Rexach is a film and video editor straddling the line between the worlds of broadcast commercials and narrative features. Also, he is a bilingual creative editor, shaping both English and Spanish language projects. Here is his description, taken from his website, that does a hell of a better job than any wording I can develop.

I was born in Santurce, Puerto Rico way back in 1971. Since I was a young child, my mother instilled in me a deep love for film. She was always shooting footage with her Super 8 film camera. She had a great eye for composition. I was first exposed to the power of film editing after my older brother divorced his first wife. My mother was very uncomfortable with the whole situation.

One night she threaded all the Super 8 film rolls she had shot and systematically cut out all the footage of my brother’s ex-wife. I remember that night vividly because I was tasked with holding the mini splicer while my mother excised the unwanted pieces of film. I was blown away by the fact that one minute my brother’s ex wife was smiling happily on the screen and the next second she had vanished. I asked my Mom what we were doing. Without skipping a beat she gave me a one word answer: “Rewriting.”

My professional editing career began in 1995 when, after graduating with a Bachelor of Science in Broadcasting and Film from Boston University, I joined the team at Lux Digital Group in San Juan, Puerto Rico. I spent two great years there. I got the opportunity to cut television commercials for some of the country’s leading ad agencies.

In 1997 I moved to Miami, Florida where I continued my editing career at BVI (now New Art Miami). I spent three years at BVI before deciding to become a freelance editor. It was during this time that I made inroads into the Florida independent film community. In 2000, I cut my first independent feature and ever since then, I have combined long format projects with television commercial work.

After eight years in Miami, I was offered a job at 1080 in San Antonio, Texas. I accepted the position of creative editor and worked with the company from 2004 to February, 2010.

Currently, Agustin is working as an in house editor at Davis Elen Advertising in Los Angeles, California while continuing to pursue feature length projects on a freelance basis.

After soaking up his interview, head over to his site Editorially Correct to check out the plethora of spots and feature examples posted there. With all that said, please enjoy my back and forth with Agustin Rexach.

 

GM3 – What qualities do you find in the clients you work with regularly? What makes you both click?

AR – A passion for communicating their ideas. I love passionate people because I am one myself. I gravitate to clients who are well rounded people. We spend a lot of time in the cutting room and it’s good to have things to talk about besides the nuts and bolts of a project. My clients and I talk about the news, politics, movies, books, art and (lately) kids. Being a parent has made me a better human being and editor, no question about it. In a way, it’s made me get over myself. I laugh a lot more. I know it sounds like a cliche, but the time I spend with my son allows me to be a kid again. I feel I’m more open to the wonders of small things.

GM3 – When working with a client for the first time how do you go about fostering a good working relationship with them, how do you approach that fresh interaction and make them feel safe with you?

AR – I love editing and my clients pick up on that. To me, editing is where it’s at. It is not a steppingstone to directing or other industry careers. I want to be an editor, period. It’s important to me that they feel that I’m not going to be phoning their project in. Also, especially if I’m working with a director, it’s important that they know that I’m not there to direct their project from the editor’s chair. Having spent some time on the production side I know all about the pressures they have and I know how difficult it is for them to acquire the footage that I will be cutting. I respect that immensely and I let them know in so many words. I think the most important thing to do on my first session with a client is listen. I listen to what they want to accomplish and if they have any doubts or problems with the material. I try to not come on too strong with my opinions at the beginning. I think it’s a good idea to get started with their initial input and let the material dictate if and when I need to make a suggestion. That approach makes the client feel at ease. As soon as they understand that you are there to HELP and not to IMPOSE your will, their confidence level increases and they feel like they can let their guard down. I also invite my clients to sit next to me. I somehow want to break through that “you sit on the couch, and I sit up front and if you want anything, speak up” barrier. A lot of new clients are intimidated by technology and let’s face it, high-end cutting rooms are, more often than not, designed to look like space ship cockpits. So in a lot of instances, the very room we work in can send that off putting message that a client should not get too close. I want them to get close because right away, it makes the client feel like an active participant in the process.

GM3 – How do you “sell” a cut? What are your methods for communicating your intent or purpose of an editorial decision?

AR – I offer multiple versions of a cut. I believe in involving the clients in the process. What I do is sit them down and take them through the multiple versions (usually 3 to 5 different cuts). I’ll have my favorite or my recommended cut, of course, and I’ll tell them that somewhere in there, they’ll see my recommended cut, but I won’t tell them which one. This is a great way to break the ice and open the conversation. I also start with the weakest cuts first and progress to the more refined ones. I believe this serves two purposes: the clients see that I put work into refining the cut, but also those first cuts can have some very interesting choices. My first cuts are very instinctual, I try not to over think things too much and that can produce some interesting results that can be brought back into the latter, more refined cuts. It can also produce absolute shit, but that’s the process.

GM3 – What should an editor know about the director/client and his personality that would help the working relationship?

AR – I think at the end of the day, everyone wants to be listened to and be taken into account. I think the thing to remember is that every client is usually beholden to another, bigger client. They are carrying all that pressure and responsibility into my cutting room and it’s up to me to create an environment where the client feels they have an ally. I love the service aspect of what I do. Whether it’s getting someone a cup of coffee or cutting their feature film, it’s all driven by my desire to please and make people happy. I think it takes a very distinct personality to be an editor. We are the bass players of the filmmaking process. Our position is not flashy or glamorous, but if we don’t do our job right, the piece will have no funk, swagger or attitude. If we do our job right, nobody notices, but if we screw it up, everyone will notice.

GM3 – How do you combat the “button-pusher” syndrome where a client is micromanaging every aspect of the edit and not incorporating you as a collaborator?

AR – This is a service industry. If a client wants to treat me as a button pusher, there’s very little I can do about it. I will do more damage to the relationship if I try to impose my will on them. At the end of the day, it’s their way of working and I am successfully serving them by assuming that role. Anything that keeps the session moving along is a positive. Usually what happens is that these type of clients will hit a wall sooner or later and get stuck. When that happens, I’m there to get them unstuck. That usually puts an end to the micromanaging aspect of things. But, again, this is a business of relationships and relationships develop over time. We are too much of a microwave society. We want everything now, but relationships need the benefit of time and repetition so that they can develop. Trust has to be earned.

GM3 – In managing a trouble client where the relationship has gone wrong, what types of things can you do to right the ship and bring a positive nature back to the relationship instead of just weathering the storm?

AR – Let the Wookie win. Always. If things get really bad I just try to keep my cool and get through the session. Deliver their product and listen to what they want and give it to them. I’ve also learned to prevent situations like this by not taking things personal, even if afterwards I need a week to vent and decompress. I’ve learned that this business has a lot of hidden agendas that sometimes I am not privy to. Sometimes clients are resistant to work with me for reasons of their own. That’s okay, you are not going to please everyone. I would rather walk away from a job that does not feel right. The sad part is when they use you as a scapegoat for their own agendas. One ad agency creative would go around the agency saying that I was not creative enough and did not contribute anything during a session. Turns out he had a big campaign coming up and wanted his sister to edit it. How can you compete with that? I only wish he had had the maturity and character to stand up to his producers and tell the truth. Why play with my reputation? But at the end of the day, you accumulate enough goodwill in the industry that comments like that are not as harmful, but it sure pissed me off at the time. If a client’s mind is made up from the beginning, let them have their way.

GM3 – How do separate your edit suite and sessions from all the other ones out here? How do you keep the clients coming back to you and your edit experience?

AR – It’s important to be technically proficient. You have to deliver an end result that’s not only creatively satisfying, but technically sound. The world’s most brilliant edit is useless if it cannot be successfully delivered to its final (and these days many) format(s). Having said that, I try to concentrate on the human experience of editing. The latest gadgets and software packages are useless if people can’t stand being around you. People come for the technology and technical savvy, but they stay for the human experience.

GM3 – How do you manage a session where you have multiple clients in the suite and the decision by committee syndrome is kicking in?

AR – I try not to add to the confusion. When you have situations like this it’s usually a battle of egos. I try not to add my own to the mix. In my experience, when things get heated like this, clients forget to even ask the editor what they think. If I see that we’ve reached an impasse, I will very gently suggest a compromise and show them. As quickly as you can, move the situation away from just talking about it to seeing the alternatives on the screen. This will get the clients into a proactive stance rather than a defensive one. Once again, the power of different versions comes in very handy. I try to send them away with more than one alternative and have them find a common ground. The cutting room should be a neutral ground for these types of situations. The only time I really put my foot down (and I tell them so) is when I see them making decisions that will damage their product from a technical standpoint. Case in point, with the transition to HD, a lot of clients don’t understand title safe, especially 4:3 Center Cut safe. I understand their frustration as it limits their design choices, but there’s nothing to be done about it. If my broadcast specs call for graphics to be center cut safe, that’s that. I remind them that their graphics will be cut off and that’s why I’m putting my foot down. In most cases they appreciate that you are looking out for them, even if you are making their lives more difficult. At the end of the day, if those graphics get cut off on broadcast, you will be getting that angry call, not the art director, so that’s a battle you cannot lose.

GM3 – When in a session where decisions are being split between director, producers, and agency creatives or studio execs, who are you looking to as the lead, how do you please each individually while pleasing the whole?

AR – In advertising I’ve found out through experience that creative is king. I usually take my cues from the creatives but with a healthy dose of the producer mixed in. By that I mean keep your agency producer informed of everything that’s going on. If there is something to be resolved, let them resolve it. I don’t think it’s an editor’s job to get in the way of how an Agency does business (and, yes, this applies even if you work as an in house editor). It is your job to execute and deliver for your clients, that’s it. Beyond that it’s like telling a stranger how to raise their kids. It’s just not a good idea. Again, advertising is fascinating that way: agencies bring these incredible filmmakers to shoot their content, but at the end of the day, every piece has an objective. More often than not, the director’s wishes do not gel with the needs of the ad agency or their client. Director’s cuts are usually more concerned with the filmmaking prowess of the piece (as it should be, since it was that filmmaking prowess that got them the job in the first place) rather than the advertising needs of the client. Again, I think that a healthy mix of both visions is in order. The director brings invaluable insight into how something should be cut, but at the same time when you combine it with the needs of your client it produces a more balanced piece. A lot of times it’s not as interesting from a filmmaking standpoint but it is successful as what it was intended to be: advertising.

Once again, versioning is key. I please the agency, but I always try to make time for directors. Even if it means staying late, I’ll try to give directors their due and find time for their cuts. I had been working on this campaign for a few days with the Agency when the Producer tells me that the director wants to drop by and work on his cuts. The thing was that the director could only make it at 7PM that night. I had the choice to say no and go home, but I opted to stay as I often do. The director came and we worked until 1AM. We had a great time, as he is a terrific person, but he also appreciated the time and effort I put in for his sake. Last year when my family and I relocated to Los Angeles, this person was, and still is, a huge part of helping me with that transition. He has always put in a good word for me and has been very supportive. Now we are gearing up for his first feature. None of this would have happened if I had opted to go home that night. Once again, this is a business of relationships.

My experience with indie features has been more unified as I usually work with directors who are also producers. The big advantage of features is you have the benefit of time. Since the post schedule is not as compressed as those on advertising, clients have more time to assimilate and get used to ideas. It’s not the same to digest a cut over a period of months than it is to digest it in a few days or even hours. So on features and docs, this process seems to be less violent.

GM3 – One of the things I really admire about you is the fact that you juggle short form advertising projects with long form narrative work. When you move between these different styles, are there any aspects of the way you work that you have to change in terms of the collaborate nature? From your perspective as a creative editor what are the biggest differences between the ad work and the narrative work?

AR – There really isn’t much difference. I try to work with people who understand collaboration so it’s not very different. A lot of times in long form work, the filmmaker feels a lot more pressure to lock the big picture. So, from the get go, they are very open to what I bring to the table. It’s worth noting that most of my long form work up to this point have been projects that have developed from relationships in my advertising work. So, a lot of the directors and producers I work with in long form already know me and what I’m about.

From a creative standpoint, I find that in long form work I feel less pressure to make a cut. The nature of spots demand you tell a story in a specific amount of time so you have make cuts in the service of time compression. In features and docs, you can let things happen because time is not so much a factor. I guess an interesting way to look at it is that features are about when not to cut, which has become my overall philosophy lately. Whether I’m cutting a feature or a commercial, I’m trying to get out of the way and let the great things just happen. God forbid I cut prematurely.

Scene Breakdown: The Dark Knight part 1

In the second installment of my series of breakdowns, I chose something a little more modern and with a little bit more action. There were two other films that crossed my mind but I decided to hold off on them till later and went with a flick that has been sitting out on our desk for while. I knew that I wanted to look at a scene with a little bit more action motivated cutting, but at the same time didn’t think I was ready for a complete action scene. I feel this scene from The Dark Knight has the elements of action that I wanted but also has long sit-down dialogue editing as well. From numerous film editor interviews I have read and listened to, a common thread appears; although fast cutting action scenes and montage are fun to put together, the simple conversation scene can be the most challenging and rewarding. When you don’t have images flashing and speeding around to hold the audiences attention, even more care must go into the pacing and rhythm of the conversation to keep the viewer enthralled. This scene has a bit of both, an intense back and forth between our hero, Batman, and his nemesis, the Joker, as well as some quick violent action. Most of my analysis is from a film editorial perspective but there will certainly be comments that deal more with directing and the other disciplines. First, I have to give credit where credit is due.

The Dark Knight debuted theatrically in 2008. The Director was Christopher Nolan, the Film Editor was Lee Smith, and the Cinematographer was Wally Pfister. It is the sequel to Nolan’s reboot of my favorite comic book franchise, and in my opinion the better of the two new Batman movies. But this is not a review; it is a study of editing. My favorite scenes in the film to watch have to be the car chase ending in the spectacular truck flipping sequence and the section where the Joker blows up the hospital; but the scene we are going to look at takes place right after the Joker is arrested. This is the scene where he is being interrogated at the police station, and is called “Good Cop Bad Cop” in the chapter menu. It starts at the 1 hour, 25 minute and 30 second mark. Its length is just over 5 minutes, and there are around 90 shots. In a couple examples I used multiple screenshots over the length of one shot to show varying action. I, again, have to split this analysis over 2 postings due to the amount of time and shots in the scene.

The scene takes place right after the car chase, which ended in the Joker being apprehended. Batman’s liaison within the police department, Commissioner Gordon, has just received news of the arrest and starts the scene by rushing into the station.

1) Gordon bursts through the door to the observation room, breathing hard in his rush to the station.

Glen Montgomery Final Cut Pro Editor

2) We switch to Gordon’s view, which is a room full of detectives, and hear his question over the beginning of this shot. The female detective shakes her head, no.

Glen Montgomery Final Cut Pro Editor

3) Cutting back to Gordon, he is already on his way back out of the observation room. Rather than showing him react to the detective, turn, and start leaving, the editor shaves time off the scene and more importantly gives a sense of urgency to Gordon’s actions. He heads back through the door and toward the interrogation room.

Glen Montgomery Final Cut Pro Editor

4) On the cut we hear an excellent electronic door lock sound effect as the door opens. Looking over the Joker’s shoulder we see Gordon enter the extremely dark room. As he walks towards the table, the camera begins pushing in slowly and we hear the first word of the Joker’s line, “Evening”

Glen Montgomery Final Cut Pro Editor

5) Next, we see a wide shot of a very darkly lit Joker as he says, “Commissioner”. Gordon walks in and begins to sit down.

Glen Montgomery Final Cut Pro Editor

6) Cutting on the action, Gordon sits down in the over the shoulder shot. The camera slowly pushes in during this entire shot and Gordon begins his questioning about the missing character, Harvey Dent.

Glen Montgomery Final Cut Pro Editor

7) In a medium close up, the Joker reacts to Gordon’s question with questions of his own, playing on the fact that he was in handcuffs during the kidnapping and bringing up the corrupt police force.

Glen Montgomery Final Cut Pro Editor

8) We go to a stoic reaction shot of Gordon for a beat of silence, then the beginning of the Joker’s biting question, “does that depress you commissioner?” In a dialogue scene like this, reaction shots are a way to change the pacing of the lines being read, but using them when they are most effective, when the audience really wants to see the person listening, will give the most punch to a line. In this case, we go to Gordon this first time only when the Joker finishes talking about the other characters and directly references Gordon. Its gives some more strength to the Joker’s jab at him, and we can see it on his face.

Glen Montgomery Final Cut Pro Editor

9) The Joker finishes his question back in medium close up. Both shots are getting tighter and tighter as the conversation goes on, with their respective cameras continuously pushing in.

Glen Montgomery Final Cut Pro Editor

10) We cut back to Gordon’s reaction as the Joker delivers another pointed question off camera. As soon as he finishes, Gordon snaps back, “Where is he?”, and then we immediately cut away.

Glen Montgomery Final Cut Pro Editor

11) Without really acknowledging the question, the Joker says, “What’s the time?”, then another immediate cut.

Glen Montgomery Denver Final Cut Pro Editor

12) Gordon quickly asks, “What difference does that make?” and then a third immediate cut. After a section of long shots on the Joker slowly talking, we have 3 quick back and forth questions with very hard cutting. It is a change in the rhythm we have become accustomed to so far, and draws our attention in to the next line.

Glen Montgomery Denver Avid Editor

13) Here the Joker delivers the important threatening line, accentuated by the rhythmic changes in the previous shots. He alludes to the fact that Harvey Dent may have time running out; and after he finishes the line the shot is given a beat, while he drives home the point with a twitch of his eyebrows.

Glen Montgomery Denver Avid Editor

14) In close up, Gordon mulls over the response and begins to reach into his pocket, all the while never looking away from the Joker.

Glen Montgomery Denver Avid Editor

15) We get a matched action cut to a wider framing of Gordon fishing a handcuff key out of his pocket. For the last minute we have been getting increasingly closer and closer in the shot framing, slowly moving from medium wide shots to close ups. Now we have pulled out again, leading us forward in the action of the scene. Gordon begins to take off the Joker’s handcuffs.

Glen Montgomery Denver Avid Editor

16) A quick reaction shot of the Joker as his eyes flick down to the handcuffs then back to Gordon’s face, inquisitively.

Glen Montgomery Denver Avid Editor

17) Returning to the wider shot now; Gordon turns and begins to exit the interrogation room. The Joker begins his next line with “Ah” right before we cut.

Glen Montgomery Denver Avid Editor

18) In his closest shot so far, the Joker finishes, “the Good Cop, Bad Cop routine”, with a wicked little smile as an exclamation point.

Glen Montgomery Denver Avid Editor

19) Now to a medium shot of Gordon, paused at the door. He mischievously says, “Not Exactly”. Just as he finishes the line we hear the loud door buzzing sound effect from earlier that makes the line pop out a little more, and he opens to door to leave. This is my first of two favorite shots in this scene, from a photographic standpoint. The other comes up in a little bit. Part of it is the fantastic lighting, with this little pool of light that falls right on the door and fades off onto the walls on either side. Also it is the framing, with Gordon smack dab in the middle of the screen looking right at us. It just stands out to me every time I view this scene.

Glen Montgomery Denver Avid Editor

20) The next 3 screenshots are all from the same 5 second shot, but I really wanted to communicate the changes that take place over its run and just couldn’t do that with one still. We return to the Joker’s close up, and hear the door slam off camera as his eyes flick from side to side. A very annoyed scowl appears on his face.

Glen Montgomery Denver Avid Editor

21) The lights snap on in the room and we see that Batman is standing right behind the Joker. I remember viewing this in theaters and jumping in my seat at this reveal, as well as hearing most of the audience jump with me. In terms of audience response, this was the moment that shocked everyone the most after the infamous pencil trick from the beginning of the film. I have to note that the sound effect accompanying the reveal is a big part of its effectiveness, as most good scares are. Think back to all the horror film moments that really made you jump, and there was a significant sound effect that helped make it possible. It starts with the sound of a switch being flicked, then a electric buzzing and hum comes in, then what sounds like a long note from a high pitched bell being played. It is just excellent sound design.

Glen Montgomery Denver Avid Editor

22) After the lights come on, Batman reaches up and slams the Joker’s head into the table as he walks out of frame. In the repeat viewings of this shot, it has slowed down a bit to me. I am anticipating what I know will happen, so I notice more of a pause from Batman after the light comes on and before he attacks the Joker. It felt so much faster the first couple times I saw the entire feature play out. In thinking about this, it makes sense. From the perspective of an audience seeing it for the first time, they need a second to process the fact that the bright light has turned on and there is someone standing behind the Joker. Once they realize that, then they can deal with the act of slamming him down on the table. This pause was clearly planned ahead of time, and plays out wonderfully. I don’t think I could have thought of that before reaching the edit suite. Hats off, yet again, to Mr. Nolan and crew.

Colorado Post Production

23) Next we get our first view of Batman’s face, albeit covered, in a medium close up. Yet again the vertical camera placement is about head height with the Joker. Going back a little, almost all the shots so far have been from this height. It is an additional subliminal note that this scene is all about the Joker.

Colorado Post Production

24) Even after being rocked against the table, the Joker is always quick to share a little joke or witty commentary.

Colorado Post Production

25) Now in a brand new wide shot from behind Batman we see the entire layout of the interrogation room as he raises his arm and swings down on the Joker again. This is the second of my 2 favorite shots in this scene. It is so dynamic after all the medium shots and close ups so far. We had a wide over the shoulder shot earlier of Gordon, but it was almost entirely hid in shadows so you couldn’t see the environment. Now we get to see everything, with Batman front and center looming over the Joker. If you look at the window on the right side you can just see the reflection of the Joker looking up at Batman and on the left side you can see the reflection of both of them as Batman begins his next assault. These little things add so much to the shot as a whole.

Colorado Post Production

26) We get a matched action cut, perfectly, to an extreme close up cutaway of Batman’s fist coming down on the Joker’s hand. Along with the slamming metal table sound effect there is a loud drum hit in the music that compliments the blow.

Colorado Post Production

27) Rather than going straight to a pained reaction from the Joker, we go to the medium close up of Batman instead. He slightly cocks his head a bit, in a way asking, “what do you think about that?” By going to the aggressor after the act of violence, it makes him a bit more intimidating and keeps us thinking about his powerful position rather the pain of the victim.

Colorado Post Production

28) The Joker looks away with the slightest grimace, and then snaps back to verbal dueling. We can see Batman beginning to sit down in the side of the frame.

Colorado Post Production

29) Batman, now seated in a medium close up, says, “You wanted me. Here I am.” As soon as he finishes the last word, we cut.

Colorado Post Production

30) Back in the observation room we see Gordon and the rest of the detectives watching what’s going on between the two of them. It has been awhile since we saw this room, so this is a little reminder that what transpires in the interrogation is not private. It also gives the editor a restart on the angles he has been using without disturbing continuity or axis rules. I don’t think that he necessarily needed to get around something, but it might be a reason. More than anything I think he knew he was going to be in a new type of conversation coverage soon and wanted to make us look away and come back to the interrogation with fresh eyes. Even though it is just one 3 second shot, it has the power to sort of “wipe the slate clean” so we can be drawn into the conversation again.

Colorado Post Production Glen Montgomery

31) Now for a fresh close up of the Joker from just over Batman’s shoulder. After what has been a long sequence of shorter shots, the Joker gets a full 12 seconds to start off the seated conversation. The still doesn’t do the camera movement justice at all. The camera is actually on a track revolving around their backs in a semicircle, so as this 11 seconds goes on more and more of Batman’s head is coming into frame as the camera moves from right to left. Just as Batman’s head is about to cover up the Joker’s, he delivers the last part of his line, “That’s cold”, and we cut away.

Colorado Film Editing

32) Immediately Batman says, “Where’s Dent?” and the Joker begins the next part of his dialogue with his back to us. A similar camera move is happening on Batman, but this time it is moving from left to right. It gives even more of a back and forth motion that goes with the combative style of the conversation.

Colorado Film Editing

So I think this is the point to split the analysis. I wanted to give you a taste of this new conversation but not get too far into it. There is a lot to come, so give me a couple days and I will get the rest out. As always I would love to hear what you take is on the shots we looked at, and any suggestions for other films to take a closer look at are most welcomed.

Check out the rest of this breakdown Scene Breakdown: The Dark Knight part 2

Don’t pull that cord!!! some XDCAM pdw-u1 gotchas

When the company I started at transitioned into high definition acquisition, due to our purposes the XDCAM format was the only solution. We certainly looked into some of the P2 cameras, but there was not a trustworthy or economic way of archiving the raw footage then. See our primary client was a large aerospace company that, in addition to full productions, needed plenty of events and processes solely documented. This massive amount of raw footage may or may not be used down the road, but it had to be there just in case. We had a warehouse full of old media captured for them over the years; Betacam, D2, One inch, film, you name it we had it stored there. Well, in the new HD era then, and even more so today, the majority of capture is tapeless. We couldn’t rely on hard drives or use the extremely expensive P2 cards as an archival medium, so we went with the full size Sony PDW-F355 camera that shoots to 23 Gb and 50 Gb Professional Discs. These discs are about the same cost as the 40 min digibeta tapes we were accustomed to shooting with and you could pull them out of the camera and throw them on the shelf without having to worry about the data becoming corrupted by time. In addition, the discs are extremely durable; I have seen them dropped plenty of times with nothing but small scratches on the hard outer plastic protecting the internal Blu-Ray disc. These are in large part why many of the reality shows such as Survivor and Road Rules chose this camera.

So in order to actually use this footage you need to use a device to transfer the files to your NLE. Go figure. You could use the camera itself, but that’s not practical. Enter the PDW-U1, a nice little disc reader for these Professional Discs. It doesn’t have deck control or any video inputs or outputs, but using USB it can read and write XDCAM clips. With anything that involves 1’s and 0’s there is potential for corruption, and there are 2 ways I know of where the PDW-U1 will ruin the precious footage you have on your XDCAM disc.

1- Don’t pull that cord!!!

This is one of those things that should speak for itself but you don’t discover it till an Oh, $h*% moment is upon you. Luckily, it happened to us while mastering to a blank so it didn’t destroy anything irreplaceable; but the scary thing is it could have. We had 3 editors sharing one PDW-U1 and while a final project was being mastered back to XDCAM disc for archival the USB cord was pulled from the machine. When this happened the disc became unreadable. It wouldn’t show up in the Sony clipviewer, it wouldn’t mount as an external drive, and it certainly wouldn’t allow any import into Avid. Now, I might be able to understand the clip that was being written becoming corrupted, but for some reason the entire disc becomes corrupt. Again, luckily this was one of the first clips being written so after a quick reformat of the disc we were back on track without too much time lost. But think if this was a master disc with months and months worth of final projects on it. Think if all these old projects were now offline and you didn’t have a clone of the XDCAM master to go back to. Wow, that sucks to think about. So don’t pull the cord, unless you are sure that it is not accessing the XDCAM disc while you pull it. Better yet, eject the disc from the reader before you pull the cord. Peace of mind is so nice when considering the alternative. Now, I would hope and expect that if you were reading from the disc with the write lock on, this act of cord pulling would not have an effect. I have not had the chance to test this one, nor the stones to test it on raw footage, so for now it is speculation.

2- Don’t delete those clips!!!

This is another gotcha I discovered while trying to make a master disc for a collection of recent projects (that were still online, thankee sai). I wrote back 2 clips, but they were not in the order that I wanted, so I accessed the disc through the explorer window and deleted the first clip. My thinking was I could rewrite the deleted clip and it would now be in the proper order. Boom goes the dynamite! Same result as pulling the cord. When I messed with the clips on the disc, it made the whole disc corrupt and unreadable. I am guessing that the file structure on the disc is similar to that of a BPAV folder from an EX-1, when you mess with it everything ceases and desists. This is a careless misstep I could see happening if you were trying to get rid of bad takes or clearing up space on the disc for reuse. If you went into a disc with 50 or so clips and wanted to get rid of 10 or so mess-ups it would render the entire batch corrupt. The thought makes me shutter. With the camera you can delete the last clip on the disc, but not selectively delete. I am guessing this file structure issue is at the core of that function. So when that raw disc is full and out of the camera, write lock and forget about it, because otherwise great anguish awaits.