4 ms·

He's got one of the best editors in the business https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thelma_Schoonmaker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thelma_Schoonmaker

rurban 4y ago
Doesn't help when esp. his editing sucks. You can see that easily when he does remakes, and compare them. Internal Affairs vs Departed. Either the editor is thinking the audience is too stupid, do they have to overexplain everything, or the editor is too stupid, or the director is too stupid. The third option being the most likely. And not even Asian directors are the best with bold cuts, African movies treating their audiences as the most clever. There's no need at all for lengthy introductions so that Aunty Karen will get it. Apparently Africans get it better than Asians, and esp. Americans. Internal Affairs run 30m longer, even with extensive backstory cuts. Unfortunately I wrote my critic in German only, https://letterboxd.com/rurban/film/the-departed/ https://letterboxd.com/rurban/film/the-departed/
ubermonkey 4y ago
<whoosh>
- Avshalom 4y ago
  nah man, editing just isn't the art of telling creators no and shortening their work.
  - ubermonkey 4y ago
    Again, <whoosh>. The expression in popular usage definitely implies "someone to tell the auteur NO THIS IS TOO MUCH SIMPLIFY IT" or similar, which results in a tighter work. This is a pattern we see in long-established novelists, for sure. They win awards or sell a ton, and their books get LONGER without getting BETTER. Stephen King is a great example. The same thing is true of some filmmakers. No one is telling Marty his movies are too long. They should.
    - Avshalom 4y ago
      Yeah, I understand that it's a phrase that morons often use under the belief that editing is just deleting things, but again, editing is not actually about telling people "no". He's got an editor, he's got one of the best most respected editors in the game, she has been working with him for as long as he has been working. You disagreeing with her editing is, as objectively as anything can be in art: a you problem.
      - ubermonkey 4y ago
        "Moron" is it? It's true what they say, you know: it's rarely a winning or charming rhetorical move to resort to ad hominem attacks when challenged.
        Avshalom 4y ago
        https://www.google.im/search?hl=en&as_q=&as_epq=it%27s+rarely+a+winning+or+charming+rhetorical+move+to+resort+to+ad+hominem+attacks+when+challenged&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&as_filetype=&tbs= https://www.google.im/search?hl=en&as_q=&as_epq=it%27s+rarel... they don't say that at all actually

rurban 4y ago

Doesn't help when esp. his editing sucks. You can see that easily when he does remakes, and compare them. Internal Affairs vs Departed. Either the editor is thinking the audience is too stupid, do they have to overexplain everything, or the editor is too stupid, or the director is too stupid. The third option being the most likely. And not even Asian directors are the best with bold cuts, African movies treating their audiences as the most clever. There's no need at all for lengthy introductions so that Aunty Karen will get it. Apparently Africans get it better than Asians, and esp. Americans. Internal Affairs run 30m longer, even with extensive backstory cuts. Unfortunately I wrote my critic in German only, https://letterboxd.com/rurban/film/the-departed/ https://letterboxd.com/rurban/film/the-departed/

ubermonkey 4y ago

Avshalom 4y ago
nah man, editing just isn't the art of telling creators no and shortening their work.
- ubermonkey 4y ago
  Again, <whoosh>. The expression in popular usage definitely implies "someone to tell the auteur NO THIS IS TOO MUCH SIMPLIFY IT" or similar, which results in a tighter work. This is a pattern we see in long-established novelists, for sure. They win awards or sell a ton, and their books get LONGER without getting BETTER. Stephen King is a great example. The same thing is true of some filmmakers. No one is telling Marty his movies are too long. They should.
  - Avshalom 4y ago
    Yeah, I understand that it's a phrase that morons often use under the belief that editing is just deleting things, but again, editing is not actually about telling people "no". He's got an editor, he's got one of the best most respected editors in the game, she has been working with him for as long as he has been working. You disagreeing with her editing is, as objectively as anything can be in art: a you problem.
    - ubermonkey 4y ago
      "Moron" is it? It's true what they say, you know: it's rarely a winning or charming rhetorical move to resort to ad hominem attacks when challenged.
      - Avshalom 4y ago
        https://www.google.im/search?hl=en&as_q=&as_epq=it%27s+rarely+a+winning+or+charming+rhetorical+move+to+resort+to+ad+hominem+attacks+when+challenged&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&lr=&cr=&as_qdr=all&as_sitesearch=&as_occt=any&safe=images&as_filetype=&tbs= https://www.google.im/search?hl=en&as_q=&as_epq=it%27s+rarel... they don't say that at all actually