FORUMS: list search recent posts

OT: editing holds in focus that made no sense.

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Aindreas Gallagher
OT: editing holds in focus that made no sense.
on Mar 30, 2015 at 1:10:00 am

given focus is a star vehicle engineered to re-introduce will smith - can someone explain to me the long hold on his refusal in the limo - why are there so many scenes where the camera holds on him for no absolute reason. It got awkward.

Why was Will Smith asked to chew his lip enigmatically for no reason so many times. If the director hadn't worked it out.
I'm still not sure why Will Smith wasn't ecstatic in that limo given the company he was in after the football game, but he froze ludicrously.
And then he literally threw himself out of the cab.

if you really want to do that stuff - you do house of games - and she shoots someone. but this is an odd child where the female protagonist becomes a female meat for a faded star. focus is ultimately a crappy mamet shadow.







will smith's entire apologia end is a dickless directors mangling of mamet's house of games where joe mantegna lives and thrives.

the entirety of focus is engineered useless objectification of women, male gaze, and largely worthless as a pursuit.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Nikolas Bäurle
Re: OT: editing holds in focus that made no sense.
on Mar 30, 2015 at 9:44:36 am

I'm pretty sure that someone of power made a decision to do it that way, either a producer or director. Perhaps the editor sugested it for more "feeling", or the director had a hissy fit since no one agreed with him, and perhaps he said something like " ....but Mamet did it!" And then the editor probably rolled his eyes, but kept his mouth shut for fear of being forced to use Avid the next time.

But why this focus on Focus? Aren't bad movies made all the time on all sorts of high end equipment and a bunch of hype to go with it? And I'm pretty sure words like great, awesome, perfect and wow were probably heard on the sets of Twilight or 50 Shades as much as on the set of Focus, or even Sharknado.

Focus will probaby be one of those films our collective memory will eventually forget, when we try to explain to our grandchildren, that our generation made better movies then their generation, and why the magnetic timeline is so much better than that new interactive 3d timeline.

"Always look on the bright side of life" - Monty Python



Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: OT: editing holds in focus that made no sense.
on Mar 30, 2015 at 1:10:13 pm

[Nikolas Bäurle] "And then the editor probably rolled his eyes, but kept his mouth shut for fear of being forced to use Avid the next time.
"


That's exactly right. It's all because it was cut on X. Cut on Premiere, this never would have been a problem. Cut on Avid, the scene would have been magic. But, since it was cut on X, the same scene is problematic. Damn little non-professional software killed this epic....

;-)

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index


Michael Phillips
Re: OT: editing holds in focus that made no sense.
on Mar 30, 2015 at 1:27:50 pm

One would need to go through the contracts on any film to see who had the right to the final edit. Sometimes it's the director, rest of the time the studio. Rarely, if EVER, does an editor have final edit on a studio feature unless they are also directing and negotiated for that right. I've worked on DGA type films where the director had final edit if the film scored a minimum of "_______" at a test screening. Many editors I know speak to their rule of threes if they don't agree with the direction of a scene or a cut is taking; suggest the change three times over the course of postproduction. If the third time is a still a no, them you let it go, you've done your job. It's easy enough to show them the change these days. It's the director's choice in those scenarios.

There was one amusing story when Kevin Tent paid Alexendar Payne $75 to keep a dissolve in the cut because he believed in it. Of course this was based on their long term relationship and trust working together, and was all in jest when Alexander said, "put your money where your mouth is." If I remember correctly Kevin offered $50 and Alexander got him up to $75. Kevin paid him and the dissolve stayed. I have to ask Kevin which film that was as I've forgotten since he told me that story.


Michael


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: OT: editing holds in focus that made no sense.
on Mar 30, 2015 at 4:45:59 pm

haha, I love that story Michael! I'm not working on features, to be sure, but every project is a collaboration, even when it is a short documentary my wife and I are making. At some point, the argument becomes, "you're not making it better, you're just making it different." Then it's negotiation and bribery to keep a cut or dissolve you want, over the wishes of your partner! We have also tried it out on third parties, only to discover they don't notice of don't care, one way or the other. As I said, "not better, just different."

Doug D


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: OT: editing holds in focus that made no sense.
on Apr 5, 2015 at 5:00:05 pm

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "We have also tried it out on third parties, only to discover they don't notice of don't care, one way or the other. As I said, "not better, just different.""

Indeed Douglas. Would love to delve into the collaborative conflicts topic with you if you were n my town.. I have run into this myself, and I agree. Most people don't even notice the small things you are battling over. They are just watching the show in front of them.


Return to posts index


Dean Neal
Re: OT: editing holds in focus that made no sense.
on Apr 5, 2015 at 9:44:50 am

Of course Aindreas...

After you assumed that the FCPX Hollywood Movie was deemed vapourware and as we Aussies say 'Bulldust'...

...you now decide to tear apart the subsequent, released movie that you railed against as non-existent!

LOL

I dig your edit chops and your wily sense of humour... but I have one question for you:

"Why have you invested so much time... deriding FCPX?"

I mean... aren't we all creatives? Don't we delight in producing positive content?

:-P

Dean...

Dean Neal...


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: OT: editing holds in focus that made no sense.
on Apr 5, 2015 at 10:56:00 pm

[Dean Neal] ""Why have you invested so much time... deriding FCPX?""

This should be interesting to see answered....maybe business is slow?

;-)

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: OT: editing holds in focus that made no sense.
on Apr 8, 2015 at 10:18:22 pm

habit. Same as everyone else here. I don't come back that often either?

It's entertaining to kick as software because it deserves it. Apple came up with a lunatic piece of software that some decided was the second coming because its insanity allowed for no other interpretation. FCPX had to be the word of god, otherwise it was largely ridiculous. It's no clothes or ermine and silk.

weren't media and events the second coming? Until Apple realised that was the height of idiocy a few years on. FCPX is pages and aperture and motion and shake - it's all the things that apple finally never had to care about, and on this forum there are all the adherents left on the rocky lifeboat of apple pro-apps laughing heartily and pretending they're not on a couple of planks of wood well out in the sea a mile from shore or cupertino.

I'll kick the raft because I'm annoyed what became of the professionally inclined apple, that it was reduced to the raft.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]