How Do You Edit?

Our day started off with a reflective editing exercise.

Since one of our three groups was missing today, our technician decided to give us a task in editing. He paired us in groups of two and gave us 14 different clips that he shot in his first year at CCAD as a basis for our edit. We were not given any clue as to what the initial story behind these clips was, but we were to make up a story out of the material we received.

The task was to review the footage and edit a story together as we seem fit. Lynley and I formed a pair so we set about to tackle that task and edit the footage. This task was made difficult (or easier, depending on your point of view) by the fact that we had to edit during another lecturer's session in the same room and our editing machines had no headphones.

Since we did not want to disturb the lecturer (and did not have any headphones with us), we decided that we would just edit the visuals and try telling a different story visually.

It turned out that reviewing these 14 clips took most of the time out of the edit. Even though these clips were not really long, it took us quite a while to find sniplets that we both liked and felt that they would advance the story. I wrote down the clip's name, number and relevant time codes for our edit and together we started editing the footage together.

After a bit more than an hour, we were finished and exported the short film with the relevant settings before saving it and entering the group crit:

Since this task was meant to make us realise what type of editors we were - rather interested in compelling visuals, focused on continuity, focused on perfect (or slanted) imagery, telling stories either subtly or boldly, etc. - I quickly realised for myself that I was not only very much focused on dynamic visuals, but also that I wanted to edit as subtly as possible to create interest, anticipation and tension.

For as you can see in the video above, I decided to begin strongly with a slanted, slightly unsettling view of a door that seems to be representing the POV of a character. We can then see a pair of feet walking along a corridor before we cut to a young woman walking down a hallway.

Is that person the same one that possessed the unsettling gaze at the door at the beginning, or is she followed by someone? Are the feet belonging to her or her stalker?

By only showing POV-like footage and fragments of a character in the beginning of the film, Lynley and I aimed for ambiguity in order to create attention.

As she moves further down the corridor, we can - again - only see her partially by her feet that seem to enter another room just to come to an abrupt stop. Something, yet invisible, has happened. And because it has not yet been revealed to the audience, it naturally creates tension. What is wrong? What happened? Is it the stalker from before?

By using the method of defragmentation in depiction of her character and situation again, I continue to show how she lets the cup fall and how it rolls on the floor before we return to her face, asking a question in what seems to be a fearful or at least tensed tone.

The audience of this short film is sadly betrayed of the final answer, since we never actually show the reason for her tense attitude (which mosty lies in the fact that we had no clip that would pose as a resolution of the story). And even though her gasp in the last clip does not fit within the edit (mind you, we had no headphones to take care of sound as well), I was pretty happy with the visual aspect of our storytelling.

However, I fell victim to one, apparently very popular, mistake many rookie editors do: I titled our film 'No Drinks Allowed', even though there is no hint in the final edit as to why the drink should be the centre of the story's conflict.

This happened during the review of the clips. While Lynley and I looked for the best footage, there were two clips that featured a door with the infamous sign 'No drinks allowed'. And even though we did not choose these clips in the end, it kind of remained in the back of our heads as a reason for the story's conflict, and so we ended up titling the story this way. However, this is something the audience will most certainly not understand unless they have access to the clips you had (so essentially never). This is where you, as an editor, need to be careful of your horizon of knowledge.

Even though I cannot yet put a finger to it, I feel that this exercise helped me unlock my understanding of subtle storytelling and subtle creation of tension in a visual way. I realised that setting the right speed, rhythm and tension of a film is a crucial part of the edit and that successful visual storytelling does not always rely on strong, bold footage, but also on subtle, almost unnoticeable footage.

I realised, that while I watched round about 2.000 films and TV series during my time at the university in Frankfurt, I often do not REALLY remember what the footage was like exactly that created the most anticipation or emotion for me. I vividly remember how I felt during these films, but seldom how the footage was like that created this feeling.

And this is when I understood where my next challenge lies: Identifying ways and alternative ideas on how to tell stories visually, in a compelling and emotional way, without creating too bland or too apparent a story or message.

I now know why cinematography fascinates me this much.