Categories
The Editors Cut

Episode 056: Editing Unorthodox with Gesa Jäger and Hansjörg Weißbrich

The Editors Cut - Episode 056

Episode 056: Editing Unorthodox with Gesa Jäger and Hansjörg Weißbrich

This episode is the master series that took place on October 18, 2020 with the editors from the Netflix mini-series UNORTHODOX - Gesa Jäger and Hansjörg Weißbrich.

Unorthodox Poster

Released in spring 2020, Unorthodox became one of the most popular titles on Netflix immediately after its premiere. With millions of views around the globe, this mini-series received rave reviews and eight Primetime Emmy Award nominations, culminating in a win for director Maria Schrader (Outstanding Directing for a Limited Series). This talk focused on the collaboration between the series’ two editors, and their journey in making the project a success.

 

Hansjörg Weißbrich photo

Hansjörg Weißbrich is an award-winning German film editor. After 25 years in the industry, he has worked with numerous German and international directors on more than 50 feature films so far. In addition to his close collaboration with highly acclaimed German director Hans-Christian Schmid (“Requiem“, “Storm“), he also worked with Danish director Bille August (“Night Train to Lisbon“ with Jeremy Irons and “55 Steps“ with Helena Bonham-Carter and Hilary Swank), Russian director Aleksandr Sokurov “Francofonia“, Academy Award-winner Florian Gallenberger (“Quiero Ser“, “Colonia“ with Emma Watson and Daniel Brühl), and Marco Kreuzpaintner (“Trade“ with Kevin Kline, produced by Roland Emmerich). 

His latest works include “Stefan Zweig: Farewell to Europe” by Maria Schrader (Austrian Oscar submission 2017), “The Divine Order” by Petra Volpe (Swiss Oscar submission 2018 and Tribeca winner 2017), “3 Days In Quiberon” by Emily Atef (Berlinale 2018 Competition), “The Aspern Papers” by young French director Julien Landais, starring Vanessa Redgrave, Joely Richardson and Jonathan Rhys Meyers, and co-produced by Academy Award winner James Ivory, and Diane Kruger-starrer “The Operative” by Yuval Adler. 

Weißbrich’s documentary work includes “Master Of The Universe” (European Film Award 2014) and social media doc “The Cleaners”, which premiered in Sundance 2018. 

For his work, Weissbrich has received numerous awards, most recently the German Film Award in 2014 for “Two Lives” by Georg Maas, that made the Oscar shortlist for Best Foreign Film in 2014

Weißbrich is a member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the European Film Academy and the German Film Academy.

Gesa Jäger Photo

While studying history, Gesa Jäger went through various internship programs, where she discovered her passion for editing and subsequently completed an apprenticeship for film and news editing at the Norddeutscher Rundfunk (NDR) in Hamburg. Following a brief period of employment at NDR, she enrolled at the Filmuniversity Babelsberg Konrad Wolf, studying Film Editing and editing several shorts and a feature film. Gesa Jäger graduated with a Master of Fine Arts degree in September 2013 with the feature film “Love Steaks”, which was not only nominated for the German Film Awards, but also won her the “NRW Schnitt Preis Spielfilm” at film+ festival in Cologne 2014 and the “Award for outstanding achievement in Editing” at New York First Time Fest 2014. 

In 2019, she was awarded the “Filmkunstpreis Sachsen-Anhalt/Special Schnitt” by the Filmkunsttage Sachsen-Anhalt, which also presented an exhibition of her other work. That same year she was awarded the “Bild Kunst Schnitt Preis Dokumentarfilm” at the film+ Festival for her editing of “Dreamaway”, an Egyptian-German co-production. “Unorthodox”, which she edited alongside Hansjörg Weißbrich in the fall 2019, has just won director Maria Schrader a “Primetime Emmy Award” for outstanding directing of a limited series.

This master class was moderated by Sandy Pereira

Listen Here

The Editor’s Cut – Episode 056 – “Editing Unorthodox with Gesa Jäger and Weißbrich Hansjörg”

Sarah Taylor:

This episode was generously sponsored by Jack’s, a creative house, Annex Pro and Avid.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

In the beginning when I first started editing, I dreamt in loops. So I am very happy that this was only in the beginning because otherwise he would get a little, I don’t know.

Gesa Jäger:

How short were the loops? Like three seconds or three minutes?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Three seconds. [inaudible 00:00:26]

Gesa Jäger:

Oh my God!

Sandy Pereira:

That’s very stressful. So good on you. 

Sarah Taylor:

Hello and welcome to the Editor’s Cut. I’m your host, Sarah Taylor. We would like to point out that the lands on which we have created this podcast and that many of you who may be listening to us from are part of ancestral territory. It is important for all of us to deeply acknowledge that we are on ancestral territory that has long served as a place where indigenous peoples have lived, met and interacted. We honor, respect and recognize these nations that have never relinquished their rights or sovereign authority over the lands and waters on which we stand today. We encourage you to reflect on the history of the land, the rich culture, the many contributions and the concerns that impact indigenous individuals and communities. Land acknowledgements are the start to a deeper action.

Today I bring to you the master series that took place on October 18th, 2020, editing Unorthodox with Gesa Jager and Hansjörg Weißbrich. Released in spring 2020, Unorthodox became one of the most popular titles on Netflix immediately after the premier. With millions of views around the globe, this mini-series received rave reviews and eight primetime Emmy Award nominations, and a win for director Maria Shrader for outstanding director for a limited series. This talk focused on the collaboration between the series’ two highly successful German editors and their journey in making the project a success. This panel was moderated by editor, Sandy Pereira.

[Show Open]

And action!

This is the Editor’s Cut.

A CCE podcast.

Exploring the art- 

Of picture editing.

Sandy Pereira:

Thank you everyone for joining us today for this discussion and welcome, Gesa and Hansjorg.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Hello. 

Gesa Jäger:

Hi.

Sandy Pereira:

Hello. So I guess first, question, how did you come to work on this project? How did you become involved?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Actually, I worked with director Maria Shrader before, especially on Stefan Zweig: Farewell to Europe, which was the Austrian entry for the Oscars that year. And Maria asked me if I would like to do the show with her and was clear from the beginning that we would have more than one editor. So Gesa came on board as a suggestion from the production. I knew Gesa a little bit, but we never worked together. And I’m very happy that we took Gesa on board because it has been a fantastic team.

Sandy Pereira:

And Gesa, so how did you get involved? Did you get the script? Did you know anyone on the production or how did that happen?

Gesa Jäger: 

I didn’t know anyone. I just got call from the production and they told me what the story was about. And I thought, okay, well it’s a strong female character. I could connect to that right away. And then at that point it was not yet official that Maria was going to direct it, but I asked who’s going to direct it. And they said, “It’s not really official yet, but it’s Maria Shrader.” And then I was like, okay, because I loved her. And then I asked, “Okay, this sounds like there’s more than one person editing, who’s going to edit it?” And then she said, Hansjörg Weißbrich. That was kind of my moment when I was like yeah, I know him because Hansjorg has edited most of the German films from the early 2000s that I love. And at some point when I got into editing, I realized that all of the films from that time span that I like are edited by him. So that was my connection and that was one of the reasons why I wanted to work on this project.

Sandy Pereira:

That’s definitely exciting. Yeah. I know having worked with somebody I admired and who hired me as an assistant and being able to mentor under them, it’s like, you have that moment where you’re like, this is life, is this real life, is this is happening. So that’s amazing that you two got to work together. What drew you to the series? You mentioned, Gesa, that it was a strong female character. Did you get to read the script or any of the script ahead of time, an outline, how much information did you get before you actually got to work?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

When Maria asked me at that moment, there were no scripts at all. I think that there was not even a summary or something, but of course there was the book by Deborah Feldman. And I met with Anna Winger, the producer and the showrunner. She gave me the book by Deborah, so I knew basically what it was about. And as Gesa already pointed out, a strong female character, but also the cultural background was something that I was very interested in. When Maria asked me, and we are good friends. I was sure that it was something relevant, emotional, and a story worth telling. So it was a little bit blind date with a script to come, but it– worked out

Sandy Pereira:

It worked out.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

It was interesting because I rarely am in a situation where you don’t have a script and you have to make a decision, but if you can rely on the people involved, you can be pretty sure that something good is coming out of it.

Sandy Pereira:

And did you get a chance to read the book then before you started?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

I was in the middle of another project and I was waiting for the script for the screenplay to come. Then I got episode one and couple of weeks later, episode two and so on.

Sandy Pereira:

And Gesa, did you get a chance to read a script before you started?

Gesa Jäger:

The script, yeah. Also the novel, I think I ordered it the same day they called me because I wanted to know right away what it was about. I still haven’t read it through yet because shortly after, that the scripts came and then I thought, okay, now I’m going to confuse the novel and the scripts. So I stopped reading, but I liked it as far as I got. But knowing what it was about was enough and knowing the people involved was enough. So I didn’t need the script to make my decision. Also, I edited a documentary about a guy leaving this kind of community three or four years ago, so I could connect to the whole theme very, very fast. I wanted to do it right away.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah, so a leap of faith from both of you to work on this, which is pretty cool actually. A testament to the people involved, that’s for sure. So when you did start working, how did you collaborate? How did you split up the work and how long did you work on the project? How long did this take?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

I started editing during shooting and I did a rough cut for all the four episodes. And then Gesa came on board and took over episode two and three. We discussed how to split the work best. And there were several options in the beginning. I think that there was a plan to even get a third editor on board for just three weeks. And we constantly had to switch episodes, Gesa and I preferred to not to switch so much and make it more a plan that splitting episodes as a whole would be better. And finally, we found a solution not to get a third person on board, and I think it was a very good decision.

Gesa Jäger:

You have this kind of Netflix post-production schedule. I don’t know if you’ve ever worked for Netflix, they have a very… quite a strict plan what happens at point to what episode. And that was why we had to switch so much. You have one week for your editor s cut, one week for director’s cut, one week for the show runner’s cut. And then there’s three Netflix cuts. At the end of the week you give the episode to Netflix, then they have one week to send their notes and then you rework the episodes. So I think after the rough cut, every one of us had six to seven weeks per episode.

Sandy Pereira:

Okay. That doesn’t seem like a lot of time.

Gesa Jäger:

It’s not.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

I think it was about 12 weeks during shooting and then 12 weeks for each of us after shooting, 36 weeks. Yeah, editing, which I think is better.

Sandy Pereira:

It’s just, when you have so many people involved, sometimes that just doesn’t feel like enough time, but you did it.  

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

The plan was, when you give one episode to Netflix and wait for their feedback, you continue working on the other episode. So we too also switched between our respective episodes, but that was the basic plan. And we somehow stick to that plan. But of course, there were episodes or scenes that took a little more time or more attention, of course. And somehow we did our own schedule, except for of course, that there were the dates you had.

Sandy Pereira:

You had to hit certain dates, but you could kind of massage what you needed in between.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

There was not so many remarks on one episode, you could steal one or two days for the other one.

Sandy Pereira:

Right, exactly. Do what you have to do. Four episodes, two editors, several timelines, well, two different timelines, more than two different timelines. And then there’s also the story of Moishe and Yanky and her aunt and Bobby back in Brooklyn. There are so many stories and layers at play. How do you manage it all, splitting the work, making sure it’s a cohesive whole? You had assistants who I imagine would’ve helped in sort of trying to manage this. How did you see the bigger picture while you were trying to put this all together?

Gesa Jäger:

Since I started editing, I’ve been using magnetic boards. I don’t know how you work, but we had this great apartment in which we were editing in, which was like a whole space just for us. Hansjorg had his room, I had mine. We had two great assistants, Daniela Schramm Moura and Sandra Böhme. They both had their own rooms. And then we had a big kitchen. And between that, there was a hallway. And in this hallway, there was a big magnetic board. So we chose still frames from every scene. We had printed them and put them on this magnetic board. And so we could take a step away from the puzzle and then get back to the Avid, which always helps me a lot. And in the beginning, I think Hansjorg said he doesn’t need it, but then he was quite happy that it was there.

Sandy Pereira:

You were a convert.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

In fact, I’m used to edit feature films and not series. And I somehow prefer to do it on the Avid and watch it and see if it turns out or not. But of course in this specific case, the stretch was a little longer and it was far more complicated with, as you said, the two different timelines and the three different storylines. It was in fact, most of the time that we spent a lot of time on structuring the show. And we did change a lot in fact and with a help, by the way, of Anna Winger, who was the writer, producer and show runner on film. And she was very open to, sometimes she was the first to say, “This doesn’t work, let’s change it. Or what can we do?” And the magnetic board was very, very helpful because we tried a lot, different orders…

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah. Were Maria and Anna in there changing things around as well? Or was it mostly the two of you?

Gesa Jäger:

Sometimes it was Maria and Hansjorg and I was standing behind them being amazed how fast they can think.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Sometimes we had a coffee in the morning, Gesa and I, and we thought, well, how can we solve a specific question? And it was a very open atmosphere.

Sandy Pereira:

It sounds like it. It sounds really ideal, like it was just sort of this hub where you guys could stand around and really look at the big picture. You can’t really do that in the Avid. You could watch it and talk about it, but to actually see it all in one, it’s a handy tool that’s for sure.

Gesa Jäger:

Yeah. It makes it easier to put a scene from one episode to another, which didn’t happen very often. I think just once or twice maybe, but that’s easier, just to take it and put it there, seeing at all.

Sandy Pereira:

And even placing flashbacks. If they come in at the wrong time, you really notice it so having something visual sometimes to just play before you actually get in there and do the work was probably really handy with something like this, because it really is layered and complicated. There is one moment, I think it’s in episode one where we’re in a flashback and then that flashback goes to a flashback. So you’ve got these and you would think something like that might not work, but it does. But I know a lot of this sometimes is trial and error. I’m not sure how much was written, but we’ll get to that later. I don’t want to jump ahead of myself. I guess we should start talking about the first episode, which Hansjorg would have been your episode. You cut episode one.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

The moment when Esther finally decides to liberate herself by putting off the wig. She doesn’t undress to take a bath, so she takes that bath fully dressed, which somehow explains the difficulties of course, she will face in the new environment. And then the whole moment is loaded with, of course, with the ritual of the Mikvah that we will see later on in episode two. And the past, you mentioned it, an artsy past of Berlin, especially of course, the capital of Germany. It’s of course a difficult decision to go specifically to Berlin for her. Why would she do that? But of course, she follows her mother. And I specifically like the moment when we see the photo of the grandmother being taken out of the envelope, she lived through that past and she is wearing the wig. And it all reflects the now and the past, and the really complicated decision Estee is taking for herself.

Sandy Pereira:

It’s almost like, this is my religious background, it’s almost like a baptism. She walks in, she takes off the wig. It is like the Mikvah as well, but this sort of baptism and she’s faced with the past and she’s faced with her future. And it’s just this layered moment. Her friend, Dasia, is sitting on the beach watching her. You don’t even really know this character yet, but you really feel. And that’s something that I have to say, and I’m wondering how you arrived there, we start with Estee escaping, the whole series, we start with her escaping essentially, without knowing her, without knowing why she’s escaping, why she’s leaving, why she’s so desperate.

We get a sense, but we don’t really know her yet. And even in this moment, still don’t really know why she needs this escape, because like you said, she’s in Berlin. On the car ride over, she talks about how this is a horrible place for her, this is a place of historical horrors. And yet here she is basically being welcomed in this lake. How in the cutting room were you able to make that moment have such an impact when we’ve only really just begun this series? We’ve only really gotten to know these characters. Was there a lot of discussion? Was this scripted this way, or did you rework the script and the opening to make that work? How did that all land?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Well, I think it has to do with the way the scene builds up. And of course we worked a lot, especially on the beginning of the show, with the escape and how much information do we give the audience and how much do we stick to the lead character? Because originally in the script, it was a little bit more intercut with the action in New York, with Estee missing in New York, with people wondering where she is. We cut that a little down to stick to her and to have her arrive in Berlin a little earlier. And then there’s a funny thing in the script. 

There was a scene in the music academy when she first meets her future friends, they invite her to join her for the lake. And she sneaks into the bathroom and takes her wig off for the first time, like to find out if she would be able to do in public. So she did it for herself, but it felt like giving away the moment. So I suggested to cut that scene out to have the full impact when we see her first without the wig and with the short hair, which is a revelation as well at that moment of the show. So I think these are the questions that build up the emotional impact of the scene as well.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah, definitely. And removing that scene was a wise, I think, very wise choice, because seeing that reveal in the lake really hits you. And if you had teased it beforehand, it definitely wouldn’t have hit the same way. So yeah, great suggestion. One of the things that I noticed the most in the series is this feeling of authenticity. There’s so much detail and so much specificity to this culture and way of life that sometimes it almost feels like a documentary. There are moments that feel so objective, but yet you never feel like you’re not with the characters.

But there are these moments, and the wedding is one of the ones that, the whole ritual leading up to the actual marriage, there’s just this feeling that you’re watching a documentary. I think it’s a combination of the sound, of the way it’s shot, of the location. There’s just so much there that’s going on. And then you have these like ultra tight closeups of her face and her eyes and the back of her head, which just kind of break that up. How did you balance that? Balance the objectivity and the subjectivity so that yes, you’re feeling like you’re watching something very authentic and you’re immersed in it, but to remind everyone this is really Estee’s point of view. How did that play out?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Generally, I think the overall topic for Anna Winger and Maria was to be as authentic as possible. They didn’t want to characterize the cultural environment as bad or something like that. It was clear from the beginning that they are telling Estee’s and how Estee experienced that environment and what brought her to flee the community. They had an advisor on board throughout the whole process, Ellie Rosen, who grew up in an ultra Orthodox community. And he advised the whole shooting, the preparation, the whole shooting and the editing process also in terms of language. He came once or twice to the editing and approved the final editing. So that was very, very important to the producers and to the director.

Sandy Pereira:

Let’s talk about the wedding. And A, how complicated was this wedding to put together and I imagine shoot, but put together in our case? And how were you able to keep it as authentic as possible, but within Estee’s POV? I imagine it got restructured and how you managed to sort of weave that into that second episode.

Gesa Jäger:

Okay. So that’s a lot of questions.

Sandy Pereira:

A lot questions, I’m sorry.

Gesa Jäger:

A lot of things to say. First, there was an immense amount of material. It’s five scenes, five wedding scenes, and they’ve shot at least three of them, I think with two cameras. Hansjorg, do you know? The first two parts and the dancing, at least one of the two dances I shot with two cameras. So there was a lot of material. And I took over Hansjorg’s rough cut, which for these four scenes, I think, or five scenes, was about 40 to 45 minute long. And every episode is 55 minutes long so it had to be shortened a lot, and with  authenticity. Because all of these rituals, which each of them is really important for this kind of ceremony and deciding what part of the ritual you can take away without taking away the essence was hard, but we had Ellie Rosen guiding us through this.

And there’s also this music that’s being sung live by the men in the takes. Like for the first scene, we had to loop it a lot and try to de-synchronize it a little so it sounds like they’re starting and we had to make it a lot longer to have the whole procession a lot longer. So that’s a part that we had to, not to tighten, but to make longer.

And then it was written as one block in the script. We looked it up earlier. Episode two is one of the episodes that got restructured all the way. I think the Mikvah was in the beginning of act two, and the wedding was the whole act three. It was a five act structure. And the wedding was one block. And we very early had the feeling that we couldn’t show it in one because it’s so intense. It’s so emotional. And you get so close to Estee and to Yanky. You have all of these moments where they get really, really close to each other. And if you use that and weave it into the present tense, the present gained so much from this intensity they have in the past. 

So we tried to put it in groups of two. The first one, we just watched where in the end, all this tension and this pressure comes off for a moment, which is a great moment to get back to the present. Most of the time we were just under Estee’s veil. I kind of fell in love with that in the script because we were supposed to only see feet for minutes, only feet and hear the rituals. I kind of liked that, but I still connect to that being under the veil a lot. And I think that you see that wedding kind of being shot with a, is the English word, hand camera.

Sandy Pereira:

A handheld camera?

Gesa Jäger:

Yeah. The camera was moving all the time so it felt a little more documentary. And then we have these very strong closeups seeing Estee under the veil. And I remember that we tried to show her a lot just being under the veil and moving, being close to her even if we can’t see her. And the moment of the revelation of the face gets even stronger. The authenticity part, I feel like I’m a little lost with the authenticity.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Basically, I think it’s a decision taken earlier on costumes, research, shooting. The way that the scenes are shot are really shot in a documentary style. And I think everyone involved knew that the scene wouldn’t be 40 minutes in the end. And that was the funny thing. I remember in the first script I wrote, there was just scenes from a Yiddish wedding to be researched, something like that. And I think that indicates the process. It was very much about research, documentary style for this specific wedding scene. And yeah, they shot it, I think in two days.

Sandy Pereira:

Over two days, wow. Yeah. 

Gesa Jäger:

With immensely long takes. They’ve been dancing and dancing and dancing and they were sweating. It felt very real. 

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah, I could see why. It really comes off like there was a wedding and somebody shot it.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Our DOP is a very famous for his handheld documentary style camera. So I think there’s also an artistic influence in it.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah, it’s beautifully done. And to go back to the subjectivity of it, sometimes it’s the opposite. We see lots of subjective tension happening, and then we break to something wide or objective, and then we get that relief. And I think this is the opposite. We have this long ritual, very real, very authentic, very naturalistic and then we smash to this like ultra closeup, or the veil or something that is very subjective. And so it’s doing the opposite of what our expectations are, which I find really striking in this, because I think that also reflects a lot of what’s going on in Estee’s world. We’re in her community and then we’re outside and we’re in just her sort of her point of view. And anyway, this scene, when I first watched it, I thought, oh my God, that would be the scene that would come in that you would keep saying, I’m going to cut that later. Because that’s what, five, six bins, multi camera. Okay, I’ll get to it. Let me cut all these small scenes first. Was that a little accurate?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Yes. So Gesa said she took over my rough cut. I think it was more like an assembly, because that’s exactly what [inaudible 00:29:42] when I got the material. And there were some more urgent topics or scenes to work with. And as I knew that Gesa would work on the scene or on that episode anyway, it was somehow a little bit like you described

Sandy Pereira:

Procrastinate a little bit on that one because it’s overwhelming, two days. Anything that is that intensive footage wise, you really have to steel yourself for it. And then to rework it over and over again, it’s a lot of work, but it truly pays off because I think that whole arc of the wedding and the relationship with Yanky, it all pays off in the end. So it’s a Testament to a lot of hard work on both your parts. Bravo.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

I like the cut how the wedding ends. I just re-watched it with the shaving, it cuts straight into the shaving and that is a very, very powerful cut I think. And that’s something that Gesa and Maria found out in the editing because originally, episode two would’ve ended with a shaving. So they replaced it earlier.

Gesa Jäger:

Yeah, because the shaving of the head is something, we’ve already seen her with a shaved head multiple times. She had a big reveal she had in episode one. So closing the episode with something we’ve already seen multiple times wasn’t that strong, but putting it at the very point where they start getting close to each other and then showing the other side of the coin, was so much stronger. And also ending the episode with being let down by the very person you love in the world, and she hangs up on her is so much stronger as a.

Sandy Pereira:

As an ending, yeah. That image of her getting her head shaved, it’s funny, you would think it would be horrific, but the way she played it. I know you didn’t have a lot of options to cut there, it looks like there’s only a few shots, but you don’t want to cut. You don’t want to cut away from her face because it’s a mixture of letting go, of grief for her hair, but it’s also there’s joy in her face and not what you’re expecting in that moment. And so it’s incredibly powerful.

Gesa Jäger:

It was a shot on the first day of shooting.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

[inaudible 00:32:26] a good wife and have children. Yeah, it’s multi-layered.

Sandy Pereira:

Very multi-layered, yeah. So her hair that she has is a wig normally.

Gesa Jäger:

It’s her real hair that gets shaven off it’s on the first day of shooting.

Sandy Pereira:

Wow. 

Gesa Jäger:

The Mikvah scene is her real hair and then this one is her real hair that gets shaven off. And after that, she always wears a wig when we go to the past.

Sandy Pereira:

Okay. So that’s another wig.

Gesa Jäger:

Yeah.

Sandy Pereira:

I didn’t know that. That’s amazing. So she’s started it off with a bang. Good for her. That’s a tough one.

Gesa Jäger:

So everything we see is real, the whole range of emotion is kind of real. And that’s just one shot, shot with two cameras, one from the side and one from the front.

Sandy Pereira:

And then some reactions. And even the reactions, those kids, they’re just fascinated, it’s just so great. I could watch that scene over and over. So we have a question, actually, Travis [inaudible 00:33:28].

Audience Question:

As an editor in Quebec who is somewhat bilingual, I find it difficult to work in my second language, French, when cutting dialogue. How do you overcome the barriers to work considering you are German working in the English language? 

Sandy Pereira:

And also Yiddish in this case, there’s three languages really.

Gesa Jäger:

We have English in school very early on and almost everything I watch, I watch in English. Most of the German TV is dubbed so you hear it in German. But at one point I stopped watching TV and started watching things in the original languages. So I’m very, very used to the rhythm of the English language. So that didn’t feel like a bigger problem to me. Yiddish was another thing, but we had subtitles from a very early point on. And after some time you could even turn that off because you knew what they were saying. And the rhythm is quite close to German. There are even words that are very close to German. So that wasn’t that problematic as I thought. I’ve also edited in Arabic once. That was another thing. So if you are really lost with rhythm, then it’s really hard to edit something, then you need someone by your side who can help you. But in this case, I didn’t feel like it was such a big problem. I don’t know. What do you think Hansjorg?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Same to me I think. English is somehow not the problem. And the Yiddish is very close to a German in fact. As Gesa pointed out, the whole rhythm is similar. So I did films in other languages that were more complicated for me than Yiddish in this case. But of course you have to double check in the end with a native speaker. And in that case, we had Ellie Rosen on our side, went through the whole film with him and that there were tiny little adjustments. In our case, the actors didn’t speak Yiddish either. So I think it’s far more complicated to deliver such a performance in a language they don’t speak.

Sandy Pereira:

 I would’ve thought that they spoke Yiddish. They were very convincing. 

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

They learned it with the help of Ellie. I guess they were somehow familiar, Shira with some Yiddish of course, but they didn’t speak it, they had to learn it.

Sandy Pereira:

Okay. And then I guess you have tools too as editors, you have a translation that you can work with, right? And your assistants, I imagine. Was it your assistants who subtitled the clips for you so you knew what you were? It gets complicated when you’re cutting dialogue. You’re cutting stuff out to make sure that it still makes sense and stuff.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Yeah. In fact, I did the rough cut without subtitles, with the script and the translation, and it helped that Yiddish was so close or familiar to German. Then we had the rough cut subtitled for the first time by my assistant. We also needed to subtitle every delivery, of course, to Netflix. So even if we spoke Yiddish, we would have to subtitle it. That of course is an enormous work for the assistants. All the delivery process for Netflix is quite a bit of work because they have certain specifics. Though both of our assistants [inaudible 00:37:16]

Sandy Pereira:

They had their work cut out for them with this one. But it’s always fun. I’ve cut some stuff as well in other languages and we get sometimes a transliteration if it’s in an alphabet that is not English in my case. And it’s the cutting out dialogue that gets you nervous because you’re like, is it going to make sense after if I cut out these words? If I reverse the conversation and start it here, and it’s always handy to have, like you guys had a consultant who could do that. And so you always have to find someone.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Pretty well. I think during the editing, without a consultant, combining two takes also was not that complicated. But I did do films in Arabic, for example, or in Chinese or Japanese, that really is a problem.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah. It gets complicated. Because obviously your English, you’re fluent both of you, but you get into languages you really are not familiar with, it gets really hard. My next question would be, and we’ve talked a bit about this, about how much the script changed. And you talked about how the wedding episode changed a lot, the first episode changed a lot. How different was the final four episodes compared to the first four scripts? How much did it evolve in the edit? Was it like night and day or?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Basically we didn’t cut out so much. The scene I mentioned earlier on was one of two or three scenes, I think, that have been cut out completely.

Sandy Pereira:

Just gone. Wow, that’s it.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Yeah. Other than that, it was more like tightening and shortening and of course restructuring. I never compared the scripts to the final editing, but it changed a lot. But it was like the whole script writing, I think was kind of a process because the whole production took place within one year, from starting the scripts to the final deliveries of the show. You can imagine that there was not so much time [crosstalk 00:39:28] the script before shooting started. So it was a fluid process. And as I mentioned, Anna, the writer and showrunner, was so open and she considered it; I think that kind of process that there is not a script you have to stick to literally, but you have to work with the scenes you shot and put it together. And she also was in the editing of course and we worked together on the restructuring.

Sandy Pereira:

So this really was truly a series that was found in the cutting room in that sense, the way it’s told. And so Gesa, was this somewhere where your board came in handy? Really, if it was this fluid, almost like a documentary in that sense where you’re getting scenes and there was more of a script in the sense, but really there was this freedom to play around. Was it mostly because of the flashback structure or was it just because of all of the storylines and they just all needed to make sense?

Gesa Jäger:

I think it’s all of the storylines, but primarily the flashbacks. Because sometimes I felt like there’s a German expression, [00:40:42]. Hansjorg, do you know the English translation maybe?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

You have plenty of options.

Gesa Jäger:

Yeah. That doesn’t sound as beautiful.

Sandy Pereira:

Too many options?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

An abundance of options.

Sandy Pereira:

An abundance of options.

Gesa Jäger:

And you feel like everything is there, it’s just not yet in the right place. And then I felt like Hansjorg was pretty good at making these kinds of connections. Like my episodes, he remembered lines from scenes. I feel like this one picture you have, of course, has to reflect the whole scene when you’re puzzling. And he sometimes remembered like that one sentence and said, okay, but if we stop at this sentence and then go to the past and not have these three more sentences, then the past would be like a magnet connected to the present or so. So the board kind of helped making those connections easier. For me, it’s standing up, going somewhere else, leaving something behind, getting my head free, puzzling, going back and then trying out. It helps me a lot.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah. A lot of trial and error with that. And a lot of moving things around.

Gesa Jäger:

Yeah.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah. Getting up and getting a coffee and just leaving for 10 minutes, coming back, it’s amazing how it’ll just sort of reboot your brain a little bit. Sometimes I find, I don’t know if you guys find this, if I go to sleep, I will dream. Do you ever do this? You dream about the scene because that’s all you can think about. You don’t do it?

Gesa Jäger:

No.

Sandy Pereira:

I do.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

In the very beginning, but somehow I think I decided I stopped that.

Sandy Pereira:

Get out of my head. 

Gesa Jäger:

Good for you.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah, good for you. But the one good thing is sometimes I’ll wake up and I’ll think, I got it. Sometimes it’s good and sometimes it’s not, but it’s the ultimate break, that sleep state.

Gesa Jäger:

For me it’s the shower. I don’t know why, but it’s like almost every time I go under the shower that I have an idea. I have never tried that, doing it on purpose.

Sandy Pereira:

But it’s probably the sound of the water, puts you in a meditative state.

Gesa Jäger:

Maybe, I don’t know. It’s the shower and the early hours of sleeping or going to sleep, lying down, not wanting to think, but coming back to something and then having that idea. Happened to me two nights ago, I wrote something down that I needed.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah. Hansjörg, you must sleep peacefully. You don’t think about work, you just tune it out, shut it off.

Gesa Jäger:

Hansjorg doesn’t sleep that much.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

It’s right. It’s not related now, but in the beginning when I first started editing, I dreamt in loops. So I am very happy that this was only in the beginning because otherwise you would get a little, I don’t know.

Gesa Jäger:

How short were the loops, like three seconds or three minutes?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

No, no, no, three seconds.

Sandy Pereira:

That’s very stressful. So good on you.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Restructuring the show, sometimes two options were not, which one would be the best. And I think trial and error, or with thinking about what could be best. Sometimes you don’t find the solution which is best for all parts of it, because it’s like a puzzle. And if you take something out here, maybe something is missing, but the part you take out is better at another place. So I think you also have to have the ability to decide in the end which options are the best. And there are always, I think, more than one option and it’s especially difficult if you don’t have an option which is totally the best or everyone agrees that it’s the best. This is another topic in the editing, of course. There are lots of opinions and you have to deal with moderating, not specifically on this show, but in general.

Sandy Pereira:

And in this case, you don’t just have your producer and your director, you also have your broadcaster. So they will have an opinion as well. And sometimes you have to figure out not just make everyone happy, but how to make sure that if they have a valid point, that it gets really addressed in the cut. And that can be difficult. So I have another question. So this is from Alex Shade. 

Audience Question:

Hi everyone. And thank you for hosting this panel. My question is about the choosing of the assistant editors and on top of the language, what other requirements or skills were you looking for? Did they have anything to do with delivering to Netflix and their delivery requirements? So choosing your assistants, were these, I guess people you’d worked before, or how did you come to put your crew together, I guess?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

In my case, I haven’t worked with Sandra before, and it was very short notice to find someone. And Sandra worked for a Netflix project before, and that was something I was looking for because I wanted to rely on someone for all the requirements, because I didn’t really want to get into that. Sandra was a very good choice.

Gesa Jäger:

Yeah. I’ve worked with Daniela before on an Amazon Prime series or show. There she was the third assistant and she came later on the project when the workload was getting too big. And she kind of saved our asses a little. And she was really good like making sound design and also has a personality that kind of soothes me in a way. So when I get stressed and I talk to Daniela I always feel better afterwards. So I knew she would be the perfect person for this.

Sandy Pereira:

Very important in the cutting room, to have that calm voice to kind of bring you down. I really would love to talk about the use of ritual in the series and how that was intercut and balanced out through the whole show. But episode three, it’s throughout, but for some reason, episode three just always stands out to me as having all these sort of rituals and counter rituals. It’s not final, but she’s starting to shed a lot of these repressions and a lot of these inhibitions that she’s been taught her whole life. And she has these moments where she feels like nothing bad is happening. I’m doing all these bad things, but nothing bad is happening. 

And this scene, it’s so beautiful especially because it is juxtaposed so starkly with that opening scene and with Yanky. Was that always scripted to be that way? Did this come organically? How did you make that all work? And also that scene in itself with music and everything, if you could talk a little bit about your work there, that would be great.

Gesa Jäger:

So these two scenes are in the place that were written that way. The episode was supposed to start with the ritual and end with the love scene. This is the first time Estee gets touched, like really touched by someone. We tried to reflect that, of course, in the way we edit that scene. I remember that Maria very early on had the idea to weave the club and the sex scene together. And I remember that at first she was not in the editing and I tried that and I worked into the wrong direction. I started the love scene in the club. I kind of let that glide into each other, not having them come home, but people dancing and they start touching. 

And with that, taking away the whole essence of the scene. This moment when she doesn’t know what to do and kind of jumps in his face and then realizes, okay, this is not the way this is supposed to be. And then him showing her in a very subtle way how to get close to someone. And when they were shooting the club scene, there was this real party crowd and Catnapp, she made the music life, the artist, Catnapp. And in one take, there was another version of the same song that Yansis playing the violin to. And it was this very slow version of that song.

And everyone started moving in some kind of wave, there were all these bodies. And the camera captured some of those moments very beautifully. And that was Maria’s idea in the beginning to get Estee and Catnapp together. She’s this version of her in maybe 10 or 15 years. She’s someone Estee could look up two. And then we started to combine these two scenes and put more and more of those women’s bodies into it. And then we had the luxury to get this track of Catnapp. She sent the stems to us. The howling of the wolf separately, it had the beat separately. It had all of those instruments.

Sandy Pereira:

Amazing to have that in the cutting room.

Gesa Jäger:

Yeah. We could decide at what point is the Wolf supposed to howl, at what point does the beat come in. And so we kind of layered that together with the touches and that works so well. I love the scene so much.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah, it’s so sensual. I think because it is this buildup too. And I think there’s a lot about this series where there are these build ups. So they pay off later, but they’re so worth the wait. And this is one of them, especially the way the episode is framed. You couldn’t have two different sex scenes in one episode of television. It’s amazingly done that way. And this brings me to another question which is the music in this series. Music is so central. Obviously, this is Estee;s escape route, is through her music or her trying to come into this music community. But yet it’s very spare the music that you’ve used in the series. It’s a very quiet series. There aren’t any huge musical moments. That moment in the club is probably the biggest musical moment. Was this a discussion beforehand? Was this a discussion in editorial? Was the composer brought in early, late? How did the music conversation come into play? 

Gesa Jäger:

Sorry, Hansjorg, but do you feel also that it’s such a quiet because I don’t feel it’s very quiet. It’s interesting. 

Sandy Pereira:

I feel it’s so quiet.

Gesa Jäger:

I feel like we have quite a lot of music. 

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

I was about to say, we have a lot music that is part of the scene, like it’s played on screen in the scene or source music. So score somehow builds around those.

Sandy Pereira:

Maybe that’s what I’m thinking of, is that there is not a lot of score.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

So if you have that big arch, like the wedding song she sings at the audition in the end, this somehow book ends the film. You have the classical tune by Schubert that is connected to the grandmother also reappearing in the audition at the end. You have all the orchestral work, the music academy, the club music, and that is something you wouldn’t use score, or maybe a score that takes over. But the tracks by Catnapp are so powerful by themselves that that was not really necessary, and no thought of using music there. The composer, Antonio Gambale, came in at the very beginning, even before shooting. They had a pitch with several composers and he got the job.

And we worked with those pictures, four or five tracks. We decided from the very beginning that we wouldn’t use any temp tracks from different soundtracks. Which always for me is ambivalent because somehow, you stick to the first sketches and using them somehow states effect at one point. Sometimes make that experience that when a composer comes in at the very beginning, you don’t have, like what I sometimes do with temp tracks, I take one or two days and just try completely different things. In this case, we stick to what we got from him, and it fitted perfectly. Like the scene in the [inaudible 00:54:22] we saw earlier,  this is one of his first sketches, based on one.

Sandy Pereira:

On one of his first sketches.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

And it works perfectly. It’s very emotional, it’s very powerful. And we decided to use it as a light motif throughout the film. And then of course there are dozens of other parts he composed when he had the editing, of course. But also the main theme is based on one of his first sketches, the title theme, during the opening titles. This was somehow the process. He was involved, he would get the cut, he would adjust the composition. He would try new things and stuff like that, and it was somehow back and forth during the process.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah. That’s great. Because sometimes you’re on a show or a feature and the composer doesn’t get hired until late. So you are trying to build tone and mood with other music and it can be really difficult. 

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

And again, gigantic temp tracks.

Sandy Pereira:

Yes. And then they all got thrown out. It can get complicated and people get attached. And so it’s great to have somebody from the beginning and to set this tone and this motif as you have described.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

But it was never, I think, never during the process, a discussion to have more music because you mentioned it. I think it was important for Maria and for Anna that the film doesn’t have an overload of music and keeps also silent moments and pure moments that don’t need emphasis with music because they’re so emotional in itself.

Sandy Pereira:

They play on their own, they really don’t need anything. And then when you have things, like in the wedding you have the men’s chorus singing, they really stand out because it’s not replaced by this overarching sort of composition. Rather, it’s just feels more natural and organic. I guess that’s what I meant by, it just never feels like the music is imposed on the series. We’re into episode four. I was thinking we could talk about Yanky when he cuts his hair, the peyot, when he cuts his peyot. And I think we’ve talked a lot about how some of the most emotional scenes are the result of this buildup, and they just have this payoff.

And this is one because I just love Yanky. And I know Yanky is one of these characters, you just want to shake him. And especially his relationship with his mother and how it imposed on their marriage. There’s so much about Yanky you just want to shake, but he is never drawn as a villain, never portrayed that way. And I know you, like you said, you took great care to make sure that there was never any villainization or anything with this community. It’s more about choices and more about freedom. And Yanky is someone who’s very late to the game. He’s just so slow in catching on.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

[Inaudible 00:57:47]Unfortunately he was too late.

Sandy Pereira:

Too late.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

The two of them coming together.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah. And I think it’s what makes the scene so tragic. 

Gesa Jäger:

I need to cry every time.

Sandy Pereira:

Every time. You’ve seen it way more times obviously. I didn’t actually watch it this time because it would’ve made me cry. It’s just so emotional. He finally acknowledges her for her and he just, like you said, Hansjorg, he’s just too late. And in a way, this is his lake scene. Not the shedding, he doesn’t want to shed his culture, his community, but he’s growing. And in a way, this is sort of his lake moment. This is taking off the wig in a way. And do you want to walk us through this and how we got it to this point?

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Interesting because the scene in itself is very simple. It’s shot very simply with shot and reverse shot. And I think the emotional impact is really what builds up to that moment. And the scene reflects the whole show we’ve seen, and the tragic of the two of them. It’s the payoff of brilliant script writing, brilliant directing and especially brilliant acting, I think. And Shira, while she’s so amazing, but also Amit is really, really great. You want them to come together because they could come together under different, or they could have come together under different circumstances. 

And that is, I think yeah, the impact of the scene. Brings her that necklace with the musical notes, which was so sweet because it’s where it all started in episode one with their first conversation about music. She tells him that she likes music and he says yeah, different is good. But then different was not so good. This is all comes together in that scene. Of course it’s about editing. Also quite a simple scene, you have to carefully weigh the moments and the frames, of course, but you wouldn’t be able to work that out if the whole buildup would not work as brilliantly as that.

It’s one of my favorite scenes. And interestingly, we didn’t change so much from my original assembly in this scene because it just worked very well. Of course, we carefully shifted frames, but the overall build up, I think, was pretty much what it is now in the very beginning.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah. It really is one of those scenes that without all the pieces that came together before it working, would not have paid off as well as it does. It would always be, I think, an emotional scene, but maybe not as powerful as emotional. I’ve watched it a couple of times now and it just really punches you in the gut. It just really does because it’s just so beautifully done. And again, I think one of the things that I find, all the themes that sort of you visit and the way that the show has been structured around a lot of rituals and a lot of these sacred spaces in this series, when he cuts off his peyot, it really is just this callback to everything that matters. It’s not a simple thing that he’s doing, it’s not an easy thing that he’s doing. He’s doing it in a way that is showing that he’s willing to change, but there’s just so much history and context in what he’s doing.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

You’re right. Cutting off the peyot is somehow getting rid of the wig, of course.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah. And one being in episode one and one being at the end of the show, it just frames the whole thing with again, choices, another overarching theme through the whole thing. I have a couple more questions for both of you. One is, how do you feel as editors, as part of telling the story, when you work on something that’s based on a true story with such a weighted historical context, do you feel extra cautious when you are cutting out dialogue, cutting out certain moments like you were saying in the wedding ritual, not cutting out anything that’s going to make it less authentic? Do you feel that there’s almost a greater responsibility when telling a story like this on your shoulders?

Gesa Jäger:

I feel like it’s a much bigger responsibility if you edit the documentary. But still of course it had a lot to do with respect for the rituals and for not cutting out something that might be respectless in a way. It’s just her past that they used for the series and the whole [inaudible 01:03:23] It’s not her personal story so all of this was a lot easier to work on and to cut out.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Deborah was somehow, while she was not directly involved in the process, but she was part of the process. And I think Anna showed her the cut before we locked it. So it was very important to Anna that Deborah was happy with it, and she was. So that is her very personal story. I think the responsibility, more with Anna, with the adaptation and Maria of course, with the directing, but I think the creative group was so much on the same page that there was no danger of being disrespectful to the story. And the other thing I think with the show is respect for the community. This is, of course, something which is sensible, that again was very important for everyone involved. So it was not specifically in the editing or for us as editors to prevent the show being disrespectful, because there was no danger because the show runner and the director were very sensitive.

Sandy Pereira:

Right. So it was always something that was kept in mind by the whole creative team. So my last question is, what did you learn on this series and how did working on this show contribute to your evolution as editors? And what would you take from this experience onto your next experience? What is the thing, or maybe there’s more that is helping you now on your next show?

Gesa Jäger:

I have to be careful not to be fangirling again, but of course for me, it was great to see Hansjorg work and to see the way he thinks and what I talked about earlier, the way he connects things to each other. So I think I learned a lot also from taking over his assemblies or his rough cuts for my own edit, to see why and at which point did you choose what take, for example. And then also Maria, she’s really wise concerning editing. And she always says she learns about everything from Hansjorg, so maybe that’s like fangirling again. 

But no, Maria’s also an actress, not only a director. So she knows a lot about acting and about how to edit someone or something in a way that it gets really, really better. And from her, I learned a lot about pacing, about breathing, about when to put a beat and where and why. And I learned a lot what to think about before even starting to edit the scene. I think before this series, I was just looking at the material, starting to work and figuring it out while I was working. And from both of them, Hansjorg and Maria, I think I learned to first use my head and then my gut.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

For me, it was a great experience working with Gesa as well, in a team and parallel that there have not been so many projects for me to work in parallel with someone else. And that is a delicate and sensible situation, I think. Every editor knows that I think, because the tiny little things you can’t really explain, it matches or it doesn’t match. And with Gesa, it was really great. We have a similar approach to things I think, and never ever had the feeling I would do that completely different, and what is she doing there? I was very, very happy that it turned out to be such a great team with Gesa. And I hope we will work on further projects again. 

And the other thing for me was, for me it was the first experience working for Netflix and was the first full experience to work in a series format. Because I mostly edited feature films for cinema, but like 90 minutes or 100 minutes storytelling. Well, both the stretch of the story and working in an environment for Netflix where you really have a tight schedule, you have to deliver and cannot push very much and handle all sorts of other things probably not so much connected to the actual editing, was a great experience I didn’t have before. 

So personally for me, working with Maria again, a great experience and brought us even closer artistically and also as friends. And we are currently continuing our work on Maria’s next film. Having a continuity with the people you work with is very nice because you get to know each other better and you can start on the next film, you can start a step ahead from the last one. So yeah, that was very great. And of course, I was very close to her when she got the Emmy because we were working together.

Sandy Pereira:

That’s exciting.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

And that was a great moment too, of course.

Sandy Pereira:

Yeah. And well deserved. And to grow together like that show to show and keep going, it’s such a great reward for all this hard work. Thank you so much Gesa and Hansjorg for joining us. This was an incredible discussion. I’m so happy that you were able to make it and to take time out of your evening to join us. And thank you to everyone who came and asked questions, and to Pauline and Ali and the CCE team for putting this together. Good evening, goodnight. Thank you everyone. 

Gesa Jäger:

Thank you for having us.

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Thanks for having us.

Sandy Pereira:

This was lovely. Thank you so much. 

Gesa Jäger:

Thank you. 

Weißbrich Hansjörg:

Thank you.

Sarah Taylor:

Thank you so much for joining us today and a big thank you goes to Gesa, Hansjorg and Sandy. A special thanks goes to Jane MacRae and Alison Dowler. This episode was edited by Jason Konoza. The main title sound design was created by Jane Tattersall. Additional ADR recording by Andrea Rusch. Original music created by Chad Blaine and Soundstripe. This episode was mixed and mastered by Tony Bao. The CCE has been supporting Indspire: an organization that provides funding and scholarships for indigenous post-secondary students. We have a permanent portal on our website at cceditors.ca, or you can donate directly to indspire.ca, I-N-D-S-P-I-R-E. The CCE is taking steps to build a more equitable ecosystem within our industry, and we encourage our members to participate in any way they can. If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please rate and review us on Apple podcast and tell your friends to tune in. Till next time, I’m your host, Sarah Taylor.

[Outro]

The CCE is a nonprofit organization with the goal of bettering the art and science of picture editing. If you wish to become a CCE member, please visit our website www.cceditors.ca. Join our great community of Canadian editors for more related information.

Subscribe Wherever You Get Your Podcasts

What do you want to hear on The Editors Cut?

Please send along any topics you would like us to cover or editors you would love to hear from:

Credits

A special thanks goes to

Jane MacRae

Alison Dowler

Sandy Pereira

Liam Brownrigg Bartra

Hosted and Produced by

Sarah Taylor

Edited by

Jason Konoza

Main Title Sound Design by

Jane Tattersall

ADR Recording by

Andrea Rusch

Mixed and Mastered by

Tony Bao

Original Music by

Chad Blaine

Soundstripe

Sponsor Narration by

Paul Winestock

Sponsored by

Jaxx a creative house, Annex Pro and AVID

Categories
Articles

Guide for Documentary Edit Schedules

Guide for Documentary Edit Schedules

The Alliance of Documentary Editors (ADE) recently released a “Guide for Documentary Edit Schedules,” which outlines considerations for producers when engaging documentary editors and assistant editors. The guidelines are intended to help producers, directors, and distributors plan a realistic documentary schedule, and are endorsed by the Sundance Institute, the Documentary Producers Alliance, the International Documentary Association and other organizations.

Categories
Articles Members

2021 DGC Awards

2021 DGC Awards

2020 DGC Awards Banner Feature Image

Congratulations to our DGC Award Winners!

BEST PICTURE EDITING – DRAMATIC SERIES

Teresa De Luca, CCE

CORONER, Episode 310: CHRISTMAS DAY

 

BEST PICTURE EDITING – MOVIES FOR TELEVISION AND MINI–SERIES

Courtney Goldman

DINO DANA: THE MOVIE

 

BEST PICTURE EDITING – Feature film

Michelle Szemberg, CCE & Orlee Buium 

ALL MY PUNY SORROWS

 

 

Categories
Past Events

Assistant Editing Workshop with Paul Whitehead

Assistant Editing Workshop with Paul Whitehead
October 23-24, 2021

This event took place on October 23-24, 2021

Presented in English / Conférence en anglais

This two-day course will cover not only the procedural and logistical aspects of Assistant Editing, but will also include a holistic overview of the politics and psychology of the editorial process and how it affects everyone in the cutting room. Insights gleaned from over 20 years of Assistant Editing experience will be shared liberally accompanied by many war stories to illustrate lessons learned the hard way. Newcomers and those with experience will both benefit from this course. 

The following bio is only written in the presenting language.

Paul WhiteheadPaul Whitehead has been a fixture in the Toronto Post Production community for over 30 years. He has worked as First Assistant Editor on over 50 film and television productions, and now edits episodic television and feature films. His career began at the dawn of non-linear editing technology, which allowed him to witness and contribute to its development over the years. Paul has taught others the art of assisting throughout his career both one on one and at the college level, and believes strongly that experience must be passed on to maintain the high standards that Canadian crews are known for.  

About the Event

October 23-24, 2021

Online

Categories
The Editors Cut

Episode 053: In Conversation with Terilyn Shropshire, ACE

The Editors Cut - Episode 053 - In Conversation with Terilyn Shropshire, ACE

Episode 53: In Conversation with Terilyn Shropshire, ACE

Today’s episode is the online master series with Terilyn Shropshire, ACE that took place on October 13th, 2020.

This episode was Sponsored by Finalé Post: A Picture Company, Annex Pro/ Avid, Vancouver Post Alliance , IATSE 891 & Integral Artists

The Editors Cut - Episode 053 - In Conversation with Terilyn Shropshire, ACE

Terilyn Shropshire, ACE provides an in-depth look at her stellar career and her collaborations, which include a 20-year working relationship with director Gina Prince-Bythewood, as well as with notable directors Kasi Lemmon, Catherine Hardwicke, Vondie Curtis-Hall, and Ava DuVernay.

From feature films (THE OLD GAURD, MISS BALA, THE SECRER LIFE OF BEES, LOVE & BASKETBALL, EVE’S BAYOU) to network television (WHEN THEY SEE US, Marvel’s CLOAK & DAGGER, SHOTS FIRED, and QUANTICO) Terilyn has had a hand in crafting some of the most revered stories on screen.

 

This talk was moderated by filmmaker V.T. Nayani.

Listen Here

The Editor’s Cut – Episode 053 – Terilyn Shropshire, ACE

Terilyn Shropshire:

When you think about it, we all edit everyday in our lives. We’re making decisions constantly in our lives,

whether how we move, or how we dress. I know for me, when I was in high school and English was one

of my favorite classes, and writing. And writing is rewriting, and writing is editing. And so I think in some

ways once I really understood how it applied to film, it made me realize that in some ways, I’ve been

preparing for this career.

Sarah Taylor:

This episode was sponsored by Finale Post a Picture Company, Annex Pro Avid, Vancouver Postal Lines,

IATSE 891, and Integral Artist. Hello, and welcome to The Editor’s Cut. I’m your host, Sarah Taylor. We

would like to point out that the lands on which we have created this podcast, and that many of you may

be listening to us from, are part of ancestral territory. It is important for all of us to deeply acknowledge

that we are on ancestral territory that has long served as a place where indigenous peoples have lived,

met, and interacted. We honor, respect, and recognize these nations that have never relinquished their

rights, or sovereign authority over the lands and waters on which we stand today. We encourage you to

reflect on the history of the land, the rich culture, the many contributions and the concerns that impact

indigenous individuals and communities. Land acknowledgments are the start to a deeper action.

Today’s episode is the online Master Series that took place on October 13th 2020, in conversation with

Terilyn Shropshire, ACE. She provides an in depth look at her stellar career, and her collaborations which

include a 20 year working relationship with director Gina Prince-Bythewood, as well as with notable

directors Kasi Lemmons, Catherine Hardwicke, Vondie Curtis-Hall, and Ava DuVernay. From feature films,

The Old Guard, Miss Bala, The Secret Life of Bees, Love & Basketball, and Eve’s Bayou, to network

television. When They See Us, Marvel’s Cloak & Dagger, Shots Fired, and Quantico, Terilyn has had a

hand in crafting some of the most revered stories on screen. This talk was moderated by filmmaker, V.T.

Nayani.

[show open]

V.T. Nayani:

I’m V.T. Nayani, I go by Nayani, and so grateful to be here tonight for this conversation, this necessary

conversation with Teri. I’m so glad to everyone for joining us from home, from wherever you are, and

choosing to be with us tonight. We’re so grateful to have you here in this conversation. I think as Teri said

just before we started, which you guys weren’t privy to, but obviously it’s still important to gather and

celebrate each other, and to continue to dream forward and move forward. I think this is part of a larger

practice. It’s a difficult time for all, we acknowledge that, and honor that. But it is wonderful that we can

still find ways to gather. I’m thankful to be gathering with you, and to be in this conversation, and to

have people at home join that conversation a little bit later. I’ll start with asking you how you doing

tonight? I love to do a little check in before we start. I guess for you it’s 5:00 PM in LA, right?

Terilyn Shropshire:

It is, yes. And the sun is just setting. So you’ll probably see it start to go that way.

V.T. Nayani:

You have a good glow right now, we’ll see it’s set with you. I wanted to get right into it if that’s cool with

you. Last night, we had a lovely conversation. And I’m so grateful to be moderating this, or having this

conversation with you. Really, it’s a conversation. I don’t want to look at it as a moderating a panel of one

person, but really just two artists, two people who are working in film sharing and talking. I’ve watched

your film, I mentioned it the first time we talked but I’ve spent my years watching your films growing up.

Some of them having a really deep impact on my early childhood girlhood. And still going back to them,

but also seeing your more recent work which we will speak to and have a chance to watch.

Something that stuck was me last night… And for those at home, we’re going to go more into the

storytelling aspect, we can get into the technical, and we will, but as a director, I often see the editor as

an integral part of the storytelling unit, you have the writers or the writer, the director or the directors,

and then you have your editor and without any one of them, we can’t get our job done. And it’s actually

my favorite part. I’m going to interview you or ask you questions from the perspective of a director who’s

really interested in your process, but also who you are as a storyteller.

Again, last night we spoke and the conversation still sitting with me because you spoke tenderly

about women’s empowerment, and agency, and giving characters agency through your work. And I

wanted to start there tonight. In this conversation between two of us who are two women working in

film in different capacities. What does that mean to you when you approach your work, and you’re

thinking about women’s empowerment and agency and in the editing process specifically?

Terilyn Shropshire:

Yeah. I’m really fortunate that the writer directors that I’ve worked with are people who are interested in

telling, obviously, a wide spectrum of stories and bring to the world a large spectrum of characters. I

think that part of their responsibility or choice as artists is to do that and to choose projects where they

see themselves reflected back. And in part, so do I. And so it is one of those things where when I’m on

those journeys, and I can be part of creating that reflection, and through the director’s lens, it’s always a

privilege, and it’s always appreciated. I think that as movie goers, we love to just immerse ourselves in

other worlds in other people’s worlds and cultures, lives, and in many ways our way of expanding our

world is through education, and travel, and meeting other people and experiencing other stories. I feel

really fortunate when I can be part of that.

V.T. Nayani:

I want to thank you for sharing. I wanted to ask you a question. I’m not going to get into all the reasons

why you got into editing, because we’re going to focus on your work. But I did want to start with having

this one question for you, which is, for me, I know I’m a director, but I didn’t necessarily know I was going

to be a director. I loved films and TV growing up which I think all of us who work in this industry love. We

have a love for the craft, and the stories that had a lasting impression on us as we were growing up. But

there were so many different pathways to get me to this point. And I’m wondering with you, how did

editing become an interest? How did it become something that you thought, “Oh, man, I could really go

for it, I could really explore that. That’s a thing I can do.” Do you remember that that moment, or that

inception? Or if there were multiple moments that led to you becoming that storyteller in post?

Terilyn Shropshire:

No, it’s a really good question because I didn’t grow up going… I mean, I would love to meet someone

who grows up thinking, “Oh, I want to be an editor when I grow up.” I want to be that person.

V.T. Nayani:

I know.

Terilyn Shropshire:

I really didn’t think about that while I was growing up. I was a movie watcher. Spent a lot of time in dark

theaters watching films. I also had a dad who seemed to always have a camera in his hand, or have a

Super 8mm in his hand, but as far as realizing the editing aspect of it, it wasn’t something that I focused

on. I don’t think that I really, really understood what it was about until I was in college. And I was literally

editing my first film that I shot, which was part of the requirement, that you had to both… I was a double

major, I majored both in journalism and film. So we have something in common.

And even in the journalism classes, and when you switch over to broadcast journalism, you had

to do everything. You had to write, you had to shoot and get on the studio and do all of that. And I think

it was really when I started to have to bring the material back into my personal space and figure it out,

did I really appreciate and truly understand what that meant. And yet, I have been watching it all my life,

but I’ve been watching the result of effortless storytelling in a sense. And I think that when you think

about it, we all edit everyday in our lives. We’re making decisions constantly in our lives. Whether how

we move or how we dress, or how we do. And I think even when we were… I know for me when I was in

high school and English was one of my favorite classes. And writing and writing is rewriting, and writing

is editing.

And so I think in some ways, once I really understood how it applied to film, it made me realize

that in some ways, I’ve been preparing for this career, because I love to write, and I also was a person

that when I was in school, my friends would bring me their papers and say, “Read this, and tell me what

you think.” And I would read it and I would give them suggestions, “Maybe if you move this sentence

here.” And I never thought about it as how it would relate to the career that I’m doing now. But I really

started feeling an appreciation for it when I actually had to become the problem solver, and try to figure

out how to fix the things that I had not maybe done right when I was out shooting.

And then when you’re in school, you also are working with other people. So then you start to

edit their material. And I just found that was the most organic and instinctive to me. And I could spend

hours doing it, and still want to get up the next morning and do it again. And I didn’t necessarily feel that

about directing.

V.T. Nayani:

I’ve tried my hand at editing and I definitely don’t… I feel that way about directing, but I think editing is…

I started from the roots. I’m always talking about the editors I work with, because it’s so fun to work with

the editor, I think you get… everyone says it, but when you’re in the edit, when you’re in that room with

someone you know what it feels like. You get a chance to retell the story, to reimagine it really, because

you have it on the page, and it’s one thing, and whether you wrote it or not is one thing as a director.

And then you shoot it and there’s all these questions and feelings that come up, and you don’t really

know where it’s going to go, you’re tired. You’ve got long days. You know there’s footage but you don’t

know what’s going to happen with it.

And then you get to the edit room, and there’s so much trust that you put in the editor that you

collaborate with. We’ll speak to some of the relationships that you’ve had with the directors you work

with. But I almost want to shout it from the rooftop every time that people don’t ever see the editor. It’s

not somebody you necessarily see all the time. But without them we have nothing. We actually don’t

have… and it’s like with any other role, and we can say that about an ACU for the focus, we can say that

about costume, but everybody’s integral, but the editor is a storyteller.

And when you mentioned being… I think there’s something at some point, obviously, we don’t

have to do it tonight, but to say about people who end up in film who really love writing or English. They

love their creative storytelling classes in high school, or growing up, they loved reading or writing. And I

think you’re speaking to… you doing those rewrites for friends, which I was also that person, speaks

directly to the fact that you are a storyteller in this process. So, thank you for sharing that. “When They

See Us” directed by Ava DuVernay, all of us know on Netflix, and we know the story and we’ve read the

news, and we’ve heard the stories for years, and then the weight of rewatching it on set is one thing.

There was so much content, and they filmed for quite a bit of time, a couple of months and it’s a

huge cast. I can’t imagine actually how much footage there was, especially for episode one. And I think a

lot of people that I’ve spoken to have shared that they struggled getting past episode one, because it’s

the inciting moment, is when everything happens. The journey that these men have been on. My

question for you is, being on set and seeing how it was being filmed, and then you getting all that

footage, what was your first reaction? I mean one, what brought you onto this project, I can imagine

from what you’ve already shared why you decided to come on board, that as well. But what was your

first reaction when you received this footage? How much footage did you receive? And how did you not

only start to process and move through it all as an editor, but also as a person to sit with that content?

Terilyn Shropshire:

As you know, it all starts with the script. I remember when Ava called me to ask me to be a part of this.

And then she sent me all four scripts, and I read them back to back. And I just remember being… by the

time I got to the last one, I was just completely devastated. And it’s always a privilege when you can take

a journey where you’re also learning about things. I knew the story, obviously, but to the depth that the

writers have really gotten into it, it was quite extraordinary. And so when the dailies started coming in

and the way that Ava was shooting, she was shooting multiple scenes for different parts at the same

time.

I was responsible for part one, Spencer Averick, did part two and four, and Michelle Tesoro did

three. We came on a gradual even though Spencer was starting to receive his dailies for two, he wasn’t

quite official, he was actually working from home. And so I was looking at all the dailies and then getting

back to production and Ava just tried to send a message every day to let her know what I was seeing. I

feel that the first time you watch dailies is the most important, it should be the purest and hopefully, you

can allow yourself to take it in for the first time as the audience would take it in for the first time.

I really don’t like to take a lot of notes the first time I watch dailies, I like to just… If I have the

time to do so, I like to just be able to experience it because I will never have that experience again. And

all editors know that. And so I just remember first of all, being incredibly impressed by the young men

who were playing the characters and because I had the five men as boys, I have the actors that were

playing the younger version. And every day I just became more and more just stricken by how beautifully

they were portraying these characters. And yet I had to focus on the characters because that’s ultimately

the stories I have to tell. So, It was never an easy day on dailies. The dailies were pretty tough, and you

had to be able to take those in and then, again, I go back and then make notes about the things that

were particularly effective to me.

I started in a very broad sense, and then you narrow things down. And then the script itself, at

least part one, there’s a tremendous responsibility because in one, you have to set the stakes, you have

to set the conflict. As an audience, they have to get to know who these young men were, as well as their

parents, and what everybody was going through so that you’re invested in them enough to want to

continue on the story. And so the script itself for part one was a bit more on the linear side than what

the ultimate version of the cut ended up being. It was shot in such a way, and conceived in such a way

where you went into each voice story. At the beginning, you get a sense of them going back and forth

and getting to know them before they go into the park.

But once you’re in the interrogations, there was a lot of going into each young man’s room, and

hearing the detectives question them, and then you go back to the detectives room, and you hear them

talk. And as we started to build it, it became very apparent that even though these boys were going

through some incredibly horrific experiences in their individual rooms, collectively, they were sharing the

same thing. They were basically being pitted against each other. They were trying to get one to, to

implicate the other. And they were in those rooms for a very, very long time. And it became very

apparent in working with the material and working with Ava, that we needed to give everybody a sense

of how even though these young men did not really know each other, ultimately Yusef, and Korey knew

each other, but it was one of those things where they were all experiencing the same hell, so to speak.

How to build that, and how to make you feel as an audience that the viewer is trapped in that

sense, as they were, and also to be able to really show what the detectives were doing in order to build

their case. And that’s very much the scene that you watch, this happens towards the end of part one,

after the boys have been interrogated for hours, and most of them without their parents, and now they

finally let their parents in. And you’re seeing the weight and the gravity of what’s happening.

V.T. Nayani:

Thank you for sharing. Yeah, I know you had mentioned that it was very linear. And in the edit it becomes

what it does. And I just wanted to understand a bit more of that process. And I guess my other question

was, how long did you guys work on that particular episode? And you got your dailies they came in,

you’re determining how you’re going to tell the story. What did that process look like as it got to the end,

because I’m interested also how it is working with the different… you’ve worked with incredible

directors, what is like working with Ava to really lock that and decide, “Okay, this is what we’re going to

do.” What did that process look like near the end, having it come together?

And half of that, the men were on set a lot of the time you saw Korey, and Yusef, many of them

stopped by, did they get to see a cut before it ended? And it’s going to go into my next question as well

with the next clip, but it is their story, were they involved at any point, or was it just you and Ava, for the

most part?

Terilyn Shropshire:

Those are good questions. While Ava was shooting, I was cutting simultaneously. And again,

communicating with her. I don’t remember really sending a lot of things forward. I think I sent her a few

scenes forward, but because she was… the schedule is pretty, non-stop. But there was also the benefit of

having the other editors around, because we could work off each other. As far as the part one process,

part one was the first and I think part one was probably one of the last ones to finish. And I think part of

it was, it was again, the weight of what it had to do for the rest of the other parts. Because one is

introduction to the young characters, and you do see them, you do see them in two.

But again, you have to be able to understand what’s going on in one. We spent a lot of time in

one, and we spent a lot of time editing and re-editing and also getting a lot of feedback from the other

editors in terms of… because the other thing too, is it was really important for me to be able to

communicate to them because we were handing off the character batons to them, and so it was

important for them to see what we were doing in one, and then ultimately we ended up finding

ourselves swapping footage. Footage that maybe was intended for one, but it seemed as if it was going

to work better and two, or a flashback, or something.

There were there were images that I had fallen in love with, with just… you know when you…

you know stock footage of New York and that time of the movie where suddenly I have this great image

and Ava would be like, “Oh, no, let’s leave that for two.” And you’re like, “Okay.” There was a lot of that.

But Ava is just… she is so clear with her vision, and very, very specific. So what’s great about Ava is just

that… and she had to move around a lot. And so in some ways you had her for a certain amount of time,

but that time that you were with her, she was so laser focused. So you could have been working on

something for hours, and then Ava would come in and go, bam, bam, bam, bam, bam. And you’re like,

“Oh, of course. Yes. Okay, we could do that.”

That part of it was great. And figuring it out. I love the problem solving part of what I do. And

with something like this, it wasn’t as if we were running into a problem. But we were running into that

realization of as you go into each room, and you keep hearing the same young man… or a different

young man say the same thing. “I didn’t do it. Who are you talking about? I don’t know who that is.” And

so in a sense, there was a rhythm to each scene that allowed you to say, “Okay, look, if we keep going

through each room, and they keep saying the same thing, at a certain point, the audience is going to be

ahead of us.” They know that these boys are going to… they’re going to deny what’s going on, and the

police are going to press them about that. So, why not create an environment where we’re moving

where one person starting a sentence, and the other person’s answering it.

Or where we disorient you in a way that you don’t know where we’re going to take you next.

And you also needed to understand and be clear that these guys did not know each other. They lived in

the same neighborhood. And like I said, two of them, and they might’ve passed each other on the street,

but you really need to understand that they were being categorized a certain way. And this wilding, and

this mentality that they all went out together. It took time to find the right rhythms and whose room

were you going to go into next? And how to how do you build that story where you understand that even

from the standpoint of someone like Raymond, who was completely just… he was with his grandmother,

and they took her out.

And he was in that room alone with those guys. And ultimately they were forcing them to

implicate the other. To answer your question, I think one took the longest, which made complete sense

that it would, and I think that with… as far as how Ava decided to show it, at a certain point towards the

end of our process, she did screen it for the actors, the young actors to see it. And then she made a

decision to screen it for the actual men. I think she flew them in actually, to watch it because she knew it

was going to be really important for them to be able to see it a certain way, and see it privately, frankly.

She was very, very respectful because as hard as it was, for us to make it and be a part of it. We were

trying to honor what they lived and what they went through. And it was always very sensitive and strong

about the story, and protecting their right to experience it.

V.T. Nayani:

Thank you for sharing. I’m going to go to the next film, “Talk To Me” the MLK clip, I’m thinking about

both pieces, both pieces of storytelling, and they are about real people and real lives lived based on real

men’s lives and what they’ve been doing, their story and their journey, but also within the larger social

political context within bigger movements. One of the questions I had was how does that factor into

your process of preparing and editing, but I think you spoke to that earlier. And so, I would love to

discuss what we had a conversation about briefly, which is the pacing. We’re going on this journey of

emotion, feelings, and there’s so many beats in there. Was that something that was on the page, and

even if it was or it wasn’t, how did you build that? What goes into crafting something that takes us

through so much as an editor?

Terilyn Shropshire:

Thank you. Well, the thing about that clip is, it speaks to tone. And when you’re working on a particular

film, where you’re going between moments of lightness and brevity and also dealing with serious topics

within the story of somebody’s life. This was a movie about a real person, Petey Greene, who was a radio

personality at WOL at the time, and this was based on his life. And he was a character. And he was

known as such. Dewey Hughes is also a real… was a real life character, this movie is about the

relationship between these two men who actually came from the same background. And ultimately,

their lives went in different directions, and yet their lives came back together. And they became very

dear friends.

The reason why I like this clip, in a sense is it speaks to, as editors, how we have to sometimes

navigate between something that is purely slapstick, or comedy, and then be able to make that shift. And

how do you do that? How can you do it in such a way that hopefully it feels organic, and feels natural to

what really happens in life, because in one minute we can be laughing, and something tragic can happen.

And life shifts on a dime, it shifts quickly. And so within that scene, it’s not even so much, really, again,

the cutting part of it, because really, the first shot is one shot. We take you all the way in until the fight

starts to happen. But it’s really about being able to bring something so crazy happening into a place

where these people are suddenly hearing one of the most devastating pieces of news that black people

heard in their history.

And so I felt like I was helped a great deal by the music and Terence Blanchard’s score, and

Tainted Love, which is the original artist, and Gloria Jones. Yeah, actually made a note on that. And being

able to go from something like that to then have Terence be able to help bring us in to what’s really going

on, because I think even when… I remember when people first started to see this scene, when you start

to see the station manager come in played by Martin Sheen, people are still laughing in the theater. It

was one of those things where even in seeing him come in, they were still in the head space of, “What is

happening with this fight?”

And just to even feel that shift happened in the audience was palpable, really. And then

ultimately, to then go into something that’s a lot more watching these people have to work, to continue

to do their jobs amidst this horrific information. The clip is shorter because it goes into a whole… even

more of the riots and more of ultimately… it then shifts into a whole musical section. So yeah, I think

that it’s one of those things where when you’re first starting out and trying to figure out your way in

terms of storytelling, part of that muscle you try to hone in on is how to be able to make those shifts in

storytelling. And how, as an editor, can you hopefully facilitate that, the way that you juxtapose the

images and emotions and that type of thing.

V.T. Nayani:

We also have two questions that are about “The Old Guard”, usually with fight scenes, or I feel like I

especially in the pandemic where I had the opportunity to pull everything back and rewatch things

multiple times. I always feel like I’m anxious and I’m caught up, and I’m missing things. Involved action

happening so fast, the tendency to cut it that way. I’ve seen in a lot of work, and what I felt about this

was I felt I was a part of everything, I saw every part of that fight. I didn’t feel like it was rushed. I didn’t

feel like I missed anything. It’s almost like I was a pilot, I was there and playing with them. And so yeah,

what was the process of editing that? Was that intentional that way? How did you approach this

particular fight scene?

Terilyn Shropshire:

It was extremely intentional from the standpoint of how Gina, how she and the DP Tami Reiker

envisioned the fight. Her conversations with the fight coordinators and stunt coordinators, and obviously

the choreography ultimately, and the training that both actors did Kiki Layne, and Charlize Theron, did to

be able to have the scene work the way it did. Gina has always… her mantra was always that she wanted

everything to feel real, to feel authentic. And she wanted to feel these two warriors taking each other on

without a lot of bells and whistles. And they purposely even within the plane, they built the plane in such

a way that they there were no walls that you could move out. They were in the fuselage working on the

fight.

And so from my standpoint, it was just really important that I honored that. Fortunately, you had

two very committed actors who really trained hard, and worked the choreography, and really made my

ability to let them do their thing much easier. It was structured in such a way that each part of the fight…

there were different stages of the fight. And so in a sense, as they were actually shooting it, and Gina

directing the fight scenes, they were done in such a way that, “Okay, we’re going to go from here to

here.” And then ultimately work on that part until they got that particular part of the fight done. It was

very much like a dance and choreography.

And then moved on to a different part of the fight. And so it was created in such a way that at

least the actors, if you can imagine, it’s a lot for them to take on, if you were to try to do the whole thing.

It was definitely divided into sections. And then it was really about them continuing to do a particular

move. And until they felt like they had the right look of the punch being thrown or being received, or any

number of those movements. And so within a take, I would actually have a lot of resets. Ultimately was

about going through and really looking at what was working, and just picking the best of the work that

they did. But it was a fun scene to work on. And it was great because there were things that ultimately,

you get a pre-stunt piece, that’s done by two of the stunt people that shows you what the choreography

of the fight is going to be.

But it takes on a completely different life when you have two actors taking on that, because they

bring their performances and their personalities, and the characters, and what the characters are going

through. And being able to capture that. And that’s part of it too, is that the whole idea of being able to

have a fight scene is it’s got to have a purpose. There’s a reason why we’re moving through it. And when

you say yeah, it’s not just about these two women punching each other out, they both have a goal,

they’re both trying to achieve something in this fight, and not just take you down the other.

This is the beginning of this master-student relationship. Nile is a warrior, she’s a Marine. She’s

going to have a certain education, a fighting styles based on how she was trained. Andy’s lived for

millennia. She’s learned every possible fighting style, she could have taken Nile down at any point. But

that wasn’t really the point of a fight, was it? For her, she’s about to bring somebody into her family and

to her team. And she’s got to see what this person’s made of. That was a fun part, was being able to let

them both have… where you get a little bit more of a window into each person’s personality within the

scope of the fight.

V.T. Nayani:

Thank you. One of the questions that they had was how did you land that job? I know you have a

relationship with Gina, so maybe that’s… how did you get that job, how did you sign up for that job? And

what was the best, and the most negative and positive, or the best and most challenging, maybe,

takeaways from working on “The Old Guard”?

Terilyn Shropshire:

I landed the job because I’ve know I’ve worked with this director for 20 years. And as artists we have

done, I think this is our sixth project together. As artists, we’ve grown together. I’ve been fortunate

enough to have earned her trust. And so when she was going to take on this project, she asked me if I

would be her editor. And of course, it was something that I ultimately, of course wanted to be a part of.

As artists, we always love to keep moving and navigating ourselves through different stories. As people,

we love living different stories and experiencing different stories and it’s no different when you’re an

editor. I was very fortunate that Gina asked me to be a part of it. I would say that as far as, I guess, what

was it the best part of it, the journey itself and the people that I got to work with-

V.T. Nayani:

And the most challenging.

Terilyn Shropshire:

Most challenging. The most challenging was… and this is not unique to “The Old Guard”, but there was a

lot of footage. And so there was a lot of footage to get through. And for me, I watch everything. So it was

a lot of time spent in a room with a lot of footage. But I think the other thing that I would have to say,

and I’m sure there are a lot of people that can relate to this right now, was having to finish a film of this

caliber at the level that Gina and I work, and everybody else works in a pandemic. And that I found to be

the biggest gauntlet that was… we have other gauntlets, but the one that really said, “Okay, how are we

going to navigate through this and be able to continue to work and make collaborative art?” Which is

what filmmaking is, “In a place where we have… a space where we have to isolate from one another.”

And I had the most amazing crew. And my crew just rose to the occasion, every single time. Even

though we were apart, we were a connected unit, obviously, Zoom, and Evercast, and Source-Connect,

and TeamViewer all of these things that kept us moving forward. And I think the thing that was also… the

thing that was hard, just at the point when I feel like sometimes as an editor, you’re still working, but

you’re starting to enjoy the fruits of your labor. You’ve gone through the production, and all that’s… the

drama that happens with that. And then you finally you’re close to locking. And now it’s time to work

with the sound people which I love. I love working with sound, and music, and scoring and all those

things where you get to move into other people’s rooms, instead of them coming into your room.

You get to go park to the scoring session, all of that went… we had to find a way to do all of

those things in a different way. And we did it, and I’m really proud that we got through, but that part was

hard. I love scoring, I love being part of hearing the score actually being recorded. And we did, we were

on Source-Connect. They were literally scoring in Iceland, and I was getting up at… I find myself like

falling asleep and waking up at three or four o’clock in the morning just to listen to the score being done.

But that part was challenging. And then not being able to see… I got to see it in Gina, and I got to see it

on the big screen, which was amazing just before, as we were doing our final checks. But when you saw

it finally at theater, it was extraordinary. And I keep hoping that we’ll do “The Old Guard” drive-in

because I really would love more people to have seen it on the big screen.

V.T. Nayani:

Yeah, I was watching it on my laptop, but I just don’t feel like it’s the same as being on the big screen so I

hope we all get to see that sooner than later. People that watched “Eve’s Bayou” before this, then you all

know that there’s a long history of her being in stories that explores supernatural and the mystical

forces, I guess, so to say. On your approaching… we talk about things that are about real people. And

then you have a film like this that explores family secrets, the rituals, and spirituality and other kinds of

practices. I’m always interested in that kind of stuff within my own culture. And so as an editor, as an

artist, as a storyteller, coming on board, documenting and putting together something that reflects

things that are so sacred for real communities. What’s your approach in that to edit something that does

mean something and does have a history, and indigeneity, and a sacredness to so many communities?

How was that?

Terilyn Shropshire:

It’s interesting, isn’t it? Because “Eve’s Bayou” was set in a world where it’s its own ecosystem in a sense

within the film. It’s this Southern Gothic world where there’s a lot of tradition, and one of the things I

loved about the script, again, all starts with the script. And Kasi’s approach to it was the idea that if you

think about it, “Eve’s Bayou” was made, and I’m going to age myself and I look at Young Journey and I’m

watching Lovecraft now I continue to be blown away by this young lady. I was blown away the first time I

worked with her, and she carries… not carries the film, but it is her… this movie is about… it’s her story,

it’s her point of view. It’s like we journey through journey.

And so what was amazing about this was… part of this too, was just based on Kasi’s life, and

how she grew up and the people that she grew up around. And be able to reflect that back in film is

something that we’re not always able to do. And certainly was much more difficult to do it back then.

And that’s what it was so refreshing about “Eve’s Bayou”. Was that you were able to take these traditions

that our culture have grown up with, and many other cultures have grown up in different ways, but share

the same type of traditions and having parents who live at home, with grandparents who live at home

with us. And kids who were basically disciplined a certain way, and beautiful women who… and black

men who were professional doctors.

This is the way that I grew up. And these are the type of people that when I read the script, and

ultimately started to work with this movie with Kasi, we were just reflecting a part of our lives that we

were familiar with. But yet it was considered different to people who maybe had not seen this type of

family. And so the mysticism part was, what was really great about this story was is that there were

these traditions, but if you can imagine it through the eyes of a young girl who, for her, it’s all both

exciting and scary, and she doesn’t clearly quite understand what’s going on. And then ultimately, she

realizes that she has this something special that’s been passed on to her from her family.

And so it was always fun to respect the magical part of the story, and to make it feel… because it

was real to these people, it was a real thing. And to be able to do that in a non-campy way and yet to

find both humor in it, but also within Eve’s mind, it was something very serious, she feels that she killed

her father with Voodoo. Like, “How do I kill my father with Voodoo?” But yet to actually have that loss, I

don’t know what kind of therapy she went through for the rest of your life. But yeah.

V.T. Nayani:

We do have a question from someone who says “Love & Basketball” is one of their favorite film. I find

that, and I mentioned this, we always focus on the love story, which is at the height of this film, and

watching those journeys unfold together and apart. And it’s one of my favorite films growing up. And it’s

so nostalgic, it takes you back to particular moments, particular time in your life. But I often find, and I

think this also comes from Sanaa, talking about her experience, prepping for and being in this film, we

forget about the process of her getting ready for it and becoming Monica, and the journey of becoming

Monica. And her story on its own, and her journey in its own.

I picked this clip, because it focuses on her, and is not necessarily we woven together with the

story of him and them together. And he talks about giving back agency in your work, and I see it here

with this scene… even if it’s one woman in the film, it’s about her journey. It’s about her story from her

perspective. What was it like working on this scene? And how did you cut that together? It’s such a

emotional moment, there are these beats there for her, and it leads to so much. What was that like, and

how did you carve space to tell the story of the individual characters, but also focus on the lightest story

of Love & Basketball?

Terilyn Shropshire:

I know, it all starts with Monica, doesn’t it? And I think that we all have a little bit of Monica in us. It’s not

the athletic part. But it’s the part of someone who’s struggling to find her place, to prove herself, to not

be limited in a world that wants to put you in a certain box, or tell you what you can’t do. And I think

that’s why we all relate to Monica, and I think that’s why we root for her because at any given point you

can be identified if you’re strong, or if you’re overly athletic, or you move a certain way… you’re basically

pigeon-holed, or people decide who you are, when sometimes you’re still trying to figure out who you

are.

I think that that’s why people really connect, aside from the fact that it’s a love story. And

because you’re in a situation where, again, this is centered around a young person, and it’s important

that… and Sanaa, again trained so hard for this, and she wasn’t a ball player, and she encompasses

Monica. And so I think that to Gina’s credit, it was also about trying to allow us as an audience to not

necessarily have each basketball game… yeah, each basketball game had to have a purpose. It wasn’t

just about showing that Monica could play, but also showing that Monica was vulnerable, and that she

didn’t always make the right decisions. And so what I loved about creating this game and building this

game, and Gina deciding to create it as a POV was what could I do to try to balance the time that you’re

with Monica in her head, basically going through what she was going through?

Initially, I didn’t have the voice, that was something that was recorded while that ultimately it

was… So it was trying to figure out building the actual POV part of the game, and when I was going to

take you in and out of that. At what point do you choose to step out of Monica in a way that he or she

would react. She would react to a buzzer, she’d react to a whistle. You go out in those moments, and yet,

even her stepping onto the court, it’s like… I was a swimmer in high school, and I remember when you

would come out to get ready to go off the blocks, and you’re walking to the blocks. And yet, you’re

somewhat aware of who’s in the stands, if your parents are in the stands.

And so I think that we all can connect to those feelings of what is it like. The boy that she has a

crush on is in the stands. All of that, that part of it was… it was kind of it’s always like putting yourself in

the position of where do I want to be as an audience? I think that the best thing sometimes you can do

as a technician, as an editor, is to remember go back to your roots, go back to what made you want to be

part of film. What it felt like to experience things, and try to approach your work that way. It’s hard

sometimes because you have to step in, and you have to be technical, and you have to figure it out. But

you have to sometimes get out of your own head space and become a viewer again, and re-experience.

That’s why I say forget what you know and try to allow yourself to have some degree of perspective as an

audience to what you’re working on whenever you can.

V.T. Nayani:

Thank you. There’s two audience questions. Speaking of audience, there’s two audience questions, and I

want to make sure we get to them. Again, Jennifer, I’m just going to read it word for word, “Love &

Basketball is one of my favorite films, what was the process of editing that final one-on-one screen

between Monica and Quincy? There’s so many quick little moments that were captured so perfectly.

How did you bring it all together?

Terilyn Shropshire:

That’s so funny that Jennifer asks that, because that’s usually the clip I show, actually.

V.T. Nayani:

Yeah.

Terilyn Shropshire:

But I felt like I should maybe show something different to this evening. Look, that game was… it was,

gosh. There was so much riding on it. I remember reading it, and I remember literally holding the script

like, “Oh, my God, what’s going to happen…” And so you want to honor that. You want to honor the first

time you experience it. That was a scene that was scheduled to be shot over two nights. And I think it fell

somewhere. I don’t know, it was somewhere… I don’t think it was toward the end of the shoot. But I do

remember… I don’t tend to always go to set. I have feelings about that, and there are some films where

I’ve been on set more than others. And it’s usually because there’s some choreography or something

going on, or playback, or something where I feel like it’s helpful for me to be there. But usually, I like to

keep a certain degree of filter, between what’s happening on set and what’s coming in to me as an

editor.

And so this was a scene where I remember seeing the early rushes of the stuff that was coming

in. And I could definitely feel that the game between Quincy and Monica. Originally, it was supposed to

be a much longer game. And then I think in the course of them choreographing that, they realized that it

was going to need to be a short… plus they were shooting this at night, and anybody who has shot at

night knows that you only have a certain amount of hours. Anyway, it came in, and I felt like both of

them by this point they both have the physicality of the game. And clearly, it had nothing to do with the

game. It was really about what was at stake at the game.

And I did feel as I was starting to put it together that I was wanting a little bit more of what the

game meant physically from an emotional standpoint, if that makes any sense. Yes, Monica would miss a

shot here, and Quincy would get a shot here. But I really wanted to feel what they were both going

through in the game. And I think that we had about 85% of it, but there was a 15% that I was missing. I

remember talking to Gina about it and saying that… because they were going to have to go back and

finish the game. It was one of those things where I did ask her, I showed her an early cut of it. That’s the

other thing. It’s like, when you suddenly have to cut something very quickly for a director, and you may…

and it may not have been a scene that I really wanted to cut right away, but I felt like I had to because,

again, there was an instinct where there was certain things I wanted to see.

I wanted to get more of the fight, get into the game of… And so what was great was is that we

looked at it together, and we found certain areas that we felt like she could go in and pick up some

things. And so when you watch it, it’s like some of this stuff is like just when they’re grabbing each other,

or he’s pushing her hand away, or a couple… I think we have like just a couple more close ups of them in

terms of relating to one another that really had nothing to do with the actual game itself. But the

internal fight that they were both going through.

And so then we put it together, and then the challenge becomes how do you take a scene like

this, and underscore it? Do you use score? Do you use source? What do you use as far as… what is going

to be the musical language of a scene like this, because so much of it’s at stake. And I remember,

because a lot of times when I’m editing, I will start to… Gina usually has a playlist when she’s writing, she

usually passes on the playlist to me, and I start listening to what she is listening to. And then I’m always

listening to a lot of different types of music. And it happened around the time that we were cutting the

scene, Meshell Ndegeocello’s album Bitter came out.

And I remember listening to it on my way in to work one day, and the song came up, Fool of Me.

And I was like, wow, this is our movie in a sense. This is what’s going on right now. And so when I got to

the cutting room, I talked to Gina about it, and we put it in. We had a cut of the scene, and I literally

dropped it in. And it was amazing. It just fell. Those happy accidents are rare. Often you have to

maneuver the music to… but it just, it was so emotional. We got so excited. I think we were running

around that editing room. It’s like we found the voice, the vocal voice of what we wanted the scene to

be. And so that was really exciting.

And yeah, it’s the scene that where you do have the cutting style of yes, the game. But then

there are times when you want to slow it down, and you want to feel what these characters are feeling.

And I think that that’s the balance of trying to have a certain momentum. But don’t lose the emotion in

the momentum. There’s a reason why this game is going on. And if they were just playing basketball, and

you were focused on the action of the game, the scene would have never worked.

V.T. Nayani:

Yeah, I saw the story of how the track was taped because that track is… I think when anyone thinks

about that movie, they think about that particular song, I think anytime they hear that song, it takes

them back to that movie, if you watch that film. Good to know the story behind you listening to the

album and suggesting it. It’s going to be my little bit of fact history that I can share with like, “Did you

know that actually, this is where the song came from?” We have two more questions, and one of them,

I’m going to… there’s one from your cousin. Your cousin Patricia. Patricia asks, “The Old Guard was so

very different…” I’m going to read her whole message. “The Old Guard was so very different it seems

from your other movies and work. Did it feel this way to you? Are there any common threads in the

movies, do you have edited you feel?” And then it says, “This silly question is from your cousin, I am so

very proud of you.”

Terilyn Shropshire:

Thank you. Oh, my goodness. Look, “The Old Guard”, what I loved about doing “The Old Guard” was it

was a perfect example of being an editor and wanting to be considered that you’re capable if you’re

really working on your craft, and you’re working on your skill, as an editor. You have lots of tools in your

toolbox, just as a director does. There’s a lot of muscles that you want to try to just stretch when you’re

an artist. And I think that sometimes when you’re working in commercial art, people want to tend to

limit you or pigeon-hole you into, again, saying what you can’t… not that they’re not saying that you

can’t do it, but they tend to want to go with what is tried and true, or the person that’s tried and true in

a particular area.

And they may be tried and true because they’ve been given the opportunity. Ultimately, us being

able to be our best selves is when people don’t try to limit us and try don’t try to tell us what we can’t

do, or don’t allow us to showcase our work. What was great about “The Old Guard” is that everything

that I’ve done before has prepared me for The Old Guard, it’s a different type of storytelling, but it’s still

storytelling, there was no reason for me to think I couldn’t do “The Old Guard”. Whereas at the same

time, I still had to go into meetings with the studio and educate them as to why wouldn’t I be able to do

“The Old Guard”. But I had to be able to do that in a way to assure them that I was the right person, even

though this was a choice of Gina’s, but there was still the necessity for them to meet me, which happens

on most films where, of course, the people that are giving you the money to make the film, are going to

want to know who have you chosen to take this journey with?

But what I would say about in terms of things that are similar, what I love about all of these films

is that they’re either telling you… they’re bringing you into a world that maybe you’ve been aware of,

maybe you haven’t certainly when you look at something like “When They See Us”, and you look at “Talk

to Me”, these were based on true stories of people you… I mean there are a fair amount of people that

knew about Central Park Five, but there are people that didn’t really know the story. With movies like

“Love & Basketball”, and “The Old Guard”, and other films that I’ve done with directors, especially the

female directors, and not to say that male directors don’t empower women, of course they do.

But being able to tell a particular story, or show a particular character through a specific lens, the

people that I’ve been fortunate to work with, really are trying to empower and show the strength of

their characters, whether they’re male or female, and vulnerability. And that especially in terms of

working with Gina, where you have women that have agency, and they’re trying to find their place in the

world. I’m just fortunate that the directors that I’ve worked with Ava, Gina, Kasi, Bob, if I start

mentioning I’m going to miss somebody. They really have a strong voice, and they want to reflect the

world that they want to see. And it’s not necessarily the world that we always are living, But I feel like

they’re trying to give us a different perspective and a different lens, and allow us to think and feel and

maybe see the world in a different way.

V.T. Nayani:

Patricia said, “Well, you knocked it out of the park.”

Terilyn Shropshire:

Thank you.

V.T. Nayani:

One last question for tonight. I know it’s getting late on the East Coast… late depending on who you are.

I tend to stay up late, I think that’s a lot of artists. And this is about “Eve’s Bayou”, we’ll wrap with this. “Is

there a part you would have cut that remained in Eve’s Bayou because the director wanted it? I read the

book a long time ago, but it was my favorite for many years. So is there anything left in that, that you

would have cut but it stayed in the film?”

Terilyn Shropshire:

That’s funny that they asked me about that “Eve’s Bayou” and none of other movies. But no, seriously,

with “Eve’s Bayou”, there was actually something that we didn’t want to cut that we had to take out. And

so it was actually the opposite happened, because in the original “Eve’s Bayou”, which you can still find

because ultimately there was a director’s cut that was released on “Eve’s Bayou”. But the original “Eve’s

Bayou” was there was a character named uncle Tommy, who lived in the house with Eve and her brother,

her family. And he was actually based on a character and a memory from Kasi’s childhood, again where

often in cultures in the past, families lived together in the same house.

Uncle Tommy was a character who had… I don’t remember whether it was cerebral palsy or

whether he had had a stroke. He was someone who was not able to speak, and he was in a wheelchair,

and they cared for him. Kasi’s memory as a young girl was having to go upstairs. Her parents say go

upstairs and say goodnight to Uncle Tommy. And for her, that that character, the idea of young kids

having to go up and say goodnight to “something” that they didn’t necessarily understand. Was a little

bit daunting to them. But yet, within Kasi’s writing and making a film, Uncle Tommy was actually a very

integral character because he ended up being the mute witness to what had happened that night that

Cisely and her dad there was a fateful evening where something happened and it changed the course of

their lives.

And that’s part of what the movie about. And yet, in the original, what you discover is, is that

you have two versions of what happened. And as we all know, again, memory is a selection of images.

That’s how we begin the movie. And our memories are different, like you and I could have an argument

and our memory of that argument is going to skew towards… But yet, within this particular movie, there

was somebody who saw what happened. But he doesn’t have the ability to say what happened. And so it

was a very layered character. And ultimately, when we… we had finished the film, and I don’t want to go

too far into it because we don’t have a lot of time. But we finished the film, and then we were told that

we had to remove that character.

And it was a big deal for Kasi, as you can imagine, as a director, to cross the finish line, and then

somebody pulls you back from the finish line and says, “No, you’re not done.” And it was the studio

decision to remove this character. And then it became my responsibility, or our responsibility together to

remove this character, and yet deliver a story and a film where you never knew the character was there.

Yeah, it wasn’t something… I don’t remember anything where I said, “Oh, this has got to go.” But I do

remember someone telling us that some character got to go.

V.T. Nayani:

Yeah, I remember Kasi being in Toronto at a screening of “Eve’s Bayou”, I guess, was last year sometime,

but I don’t know what time is anymore. But I remember her sharing that story. And I remember being an

audience. Do you remember what that feels like to be in an audience? And we were all like, “What?” And

it was a collective… especially not a filmmaking audience, in my mind that sometimes some of the

decisions it’s hard. It’s hard because we’re artists and, especially, I think for a story that’s so personal,

and comes out of your experience in some way. Yeah, I remember the collective gasp, so thank you for

sharing that story.

Thank you for tonight, thank you for making time to chat with us. Again, I was so excited to

speak with you. And I’m so glad that I know you a little bit. And I hope we can continue the conversation.

Just for making your time and being open and willing to share because this is how we learn. And this is

how we grow. We’re a community, for those who are filmmakers here and those who aren’t, and who

are just film lovers. Film never gets done. And you said it earlier, film never gets done on our own. And

we’re all integral to the process. I’m excited to see what you work on next. But it’s been a beautiful

career to watch. And I know there’s so much more to come, so thank you again.

Terilyn Shropshire:

Well, thank you. And I’m looking forward to seeing what you do next as well. And I really want to thank

you for taking the time to get my work, and ask such great questions and steer us through this. I want to

also thank the Canadian Cinema Editors for this honor of being able to talk with your group, and we’re all

in this together. So I really do appreciate it.

V.T. Nayani:

Thank you, Teri. Have a good night everyone, take good care, and I’m just wishing health and wellness for

everybody.

Sarah Taylor:

Thanks so much for joining us today, and a big thanks goes to Terilyn, and V.T. for taking the time to sit

with us. Our special thanks goes to Jane MacRae and Nagham Osman. This episode was edited by Alex

Schead. The main title sound design was created by Jane Tattersall, additional ADR recording by Andrea

Rusch. Original music provided by Chad Blain and Soundstripe. This episode was mixed and mastered by

Tony Bao.

The CCE has been supporting Indspire – an organization that provides funding and scholarships to

Indigenous post secondary students. We have a permanent portal on our website at cceditors.ca or you

can donate directly at indspire.ca. The CCE is taking steps to build a more equitable ecosystem within our

industry and we encourage our members to participate in any way they can.

If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please rate and review us on Apple Podcasts and tell your friends to tune

in. ‘Til next time I’m your host Sarah Taylor.

[Outtro]

The CCE is a non-profit organization with the goal of bettering the art and science of picture editing. If

you wish to become a CCE member please visit our website www.cceditors.ca. Join our great community

of Canadian editors for more related info.

Subscribe Wherever You Get Your Podcasts

What do you want to hear on The Editors Cut?

Please send along any topics you would like us to cover or editors you would love to hear from:

Credits

A special thanks goes to

Jane MacRae

Nagham Osman

Hosted and Produced by

Sarah Taylor

Edited by

Alex Schead

Main Title Sound Design by

Jane Tattersall

ADR Recording by

Andrea Rusch

Mixed and Mastered by

Tony Bao

Original Music by

Chad Blain

Sound Stripe

Sponsor Narration by

Paul Winestock

Sponsored by

Finalé Post: A Picture Company, Annex Pro/ Avid, Vancouver Post Alliance , IATSE 891 & Integral Artists

Categories
Articles Members

Congratulations: 2021 DGC Award Nominations

2021 DGC Awards

2020 DGC Awards Banner Feature Image

Congratulations to our DGC Award Nominations!

BEST PICTURE EDITING – FEATURE FILM

Michelle Szemberg, CCE & Orlee Buium

All My Puny Sorrows

 

BEST PICTURE EDITING – DOCUMENTARY

Steve Taylor, CCE

A.rtificial I.mmortality

 

Caroline Christie, CCE

Duet for Solo Piano

Categories
Past Events

Offline Events Across Canada

Offline Events Across Canada
September 19, 2021

This event took place on September 19, 2021

The CCE relaunched its outdoor wellness group – Offline! On September 19th, members and non members gathered at locations all across Canada as we took a break from our screens, got outside and walked in support of the Terry Fox Foundation! 

Edmonton participants met at Hawrelak Park.

Halifax participants met at Point Pleasant Drive.

Montreal participants met at Mont-Royal Park.

Toronto participants met at the Beaches Boardwalk.

About the Event

September 19, 2021

Toronto, Edmonton, Vancouver, Halifax, Montreal

Categories
The Editors Cut

Episode 052 – Interview with Elisabet Ronaldsdóttir

The Editors Cut - Episode 0052 - Interview with Elisabet Ronaldsdóttir

Episode 52: Interview with Elisabet Ronaldsdóttir

In this episode Sarah Taylor sits down with Elisabet Ronaldsdóttir.

Elisabet has a killer film resume and has cut many much loved action films – Atomic Blond, John Wick and Deadpool 2 to name a few.

This month she has two new films coming out – Marvel’s latest SHANG-CHI AND THE LEGEND OF THE TEN RINGS and the Netflix film KATE. Elisabet shares her career journey and so much wisdom!

Listen Here

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I have women or people of color, for example, in the cast. I try to remember that I am not raised

in a just society. So, I might have ideas that go against what these people are bringing to the

table, and I have to be aware of it. I ask myself, again, “Should I cut that dialogue out? Why am I

cutting it?” Just so I have a fighting chance to work against my possible prejudices.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Hello, and welcome to The Editor’s Cut. I’m your host, Sarah Taylor. We would like to point out

that the lands on which we have created this podcast, and that many of you may be listening to

us from, are part of ancestral territory. It is important for all of us to deeply acknowledge that we

are on ancestral territory that has long served as a place where indigenous peoples have lived,

met, and interacted. We honor, respect, and recognize these nations that have never

relinquished their rights or sovereign authority over the lands and waters on which we stand

today. We encourage you to reflect on the history of the land, the rich culture, the many

contributions, and the concerns that impact indigenous individuals and communities. Land

acknowledgements are the start to a deeper action.

Before we get into today’s episode, the CCE is excited to be involved with the Calgary

International Film Festival’s Industry Week, from Thursday September 23rd to Sunday

September 26th. No matter where you are in your career, they are inviting those in the film, TV,

and adjacent industries, to mix, mingle, celebrate, and learn. Industry Week will feature inspiring

and engaging programming, tailor-made for industry professionals. Expand your knowledge, find

your inspirational fuel, and grow your connections. Your seat is waiting at the Calgary

International Film Festival’s first ever Industry Week. And, I’ll be there, moderating a panel with

the editors from Ghostbusters: Afterlife. Join us on September 26th, online or in person. I hope

to see you there.

Today, I bring to you the lovely Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir. Elísabet has a killer film résumé.

She’s cut many much loved action films, Atomic Blonde, John Wick, and Deadpool 2, just to

name a few. This month, she has two new films coming out, Marvel’s latest, Shang-Chi and the

Legend of the Ten Rings, and the Netflix film, Kate. Elísabet shares with us her journey and so

much wisdom. I want to be like her when I grow up. Please enjoy Elísabet.

Speaker 3:

And, action.

Speaker 5:

This is The Editor’s Cut.

Speaker 4:

A CCE podcast.

Speaker 5:

Exploring, exploring, exploring, the art…

Speaker 4:

Of picture editing.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Welcome, Elísabet, to The Editor’s Cut, thank you so much for joining me today.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Thank you for having me, Sarah.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

My first question is, where are you from? And, what led you into the world of editing?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

It’s a long story. I’m born and raised in Iceland, in Reykjavík. I’ve always been fascinated my

movies. When I was young, every week we would get to go to the movie house, because we

would go with the newspapers. And, [inaudible 00:03:07], we would get a movie every week. I

would go, and I was fascinated by this world. And, obviously never ever had an idea that I would

become a part of it. But, I was fascinated by that world, and the movies, and that form of

storytelling. And, when I’m, I think I’m 19 or 20, I decided to go to a film school. So, I went to

London International Film School, in Soho, in London.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Nice.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

It was a lovely experience. But, you don’t learn how to make movies. You learn to use some

equipment or get accustomed to some of the equipment. And, you get really good connections

with people who have the same interest as you. And then, it’s a lifetime of practice and doing

things over and over again. I’m still learning. I don’t think this is a form you can learn. I guess any

art form, you can’t learn it, you just have to live it, and fail, and try again.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yes.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

So, that’s how I started films. But, in London Film School, I was set on becoming a

cinematographer. That was my passion and fascination, and then, I learnt through the years, I

learnt about editing and got more and more fascinated by editing. I also ended there because I

was getting pregnant all the time, I have four children, and it looked just easier to control my

time when I’m in the editing room. It’s difficult if you have 100 people on-set waiting for you and

you have to manage children, it’s easier with the post.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

What was your first job in the industry? Was it in London, or was it in Iceland, where were you?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

My first job in the industry was in Iceland. I was hired to answer telephones in a production

company that produced mainly interviews for TV and commercials. I think I stayed on the phone

for like two days and then I just dived head-first into production. Mainly as a set decorator for

the longest time, on commercials, and just assisting here and there. That’s how I started in this

business.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

How did you make your move into editing? You had some babies and you thought, “I need to go

into the edit room,” or did you do editing prior to that?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I got pregnant and no one knew. I think I was six or seven months pregnant, and I was working

as a focus puller on a small Icelandic movie, and the DP realized suddenly I was pregnant and

they got so scared. It had to do with insurance and all kinds of stuff. But, they didn’t want to

throw me out, so they just invited me into the editing room. So, that’s how I started. I [inaudible

00:06:27] realize I’m very privileged in that way, that I just walked into an editing job. I didn’t

assist. I assisted myself, obviously, it’s small production in Iceland, so you kind of have to assist

yourself. But, I was editing from day one that I stepped into an editing room. That is a privilege.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Totally.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I think it’s also just the time. Now, it’s probably more difficult because more people have learnt

about the magic of editing and want to do it. So, it’s a more difficult task to get in there. But, I

was there at the right time.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yeah, at the right time and then also in a smaller market. Because, even for me in Alberta, I’m

based in Edmonton, and it’s a very small market, and so I do my assisting, I do my editing.

Sometimes I get an assistant and then it feels wonderful, but then you learn so much and you

get to do so many different genres, which I think is really fun too.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Yeah.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

So, you came from an Icelandic market, you started editing, I’m assuming you did lots of

Icelandic films?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Yeah, I did some. But, I moved to Denmark. I was going to Denmark to work on this movie for

Nordisk Film, but my parents at that point lived in Sweden. So, I actually moved to Sweden and

then I took a boat between Sweden and Denmark every day, because I needed my parents to

help me with the kids and my siblings, who all lived in Sweden. So, I moved to Sweden and took

the boat, and was working on Nordisk Film. I also did a year at a TV station in Denmark. That’s

probably the best school I’ve been to, where you have to work really fast and get to the heart of

the story in as a precise way as possible. I think that was very good training. I did a lot of Danish

movies, and documentaries, and TV, and then I moved back home to Iceland and kept doing

Icelandic movies.

I did a movie called Reykjavik-Rotterdam, an Icelandic movie directed by Óskar

Jónasson, and it was remade in the State as Contraband.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Oh, yeah.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I was asked to edit Contraband as well.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Cool.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Baltasar Kormákur directed that movie, and it was co-production between Working Title in

London, in England, and Universal. It was a big step into the American market.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

No kidding.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

There was no [inaudible 00:09:04]. It was straight into a big production with Universal and

Working Title. That was such an amazing experience. It was actually through Contraband that I

met an Editor, Dody Dorn, who is an American editor. Amazing editor. She just did the recut of

The Snyder Cut for [inaudible 00:09:33], and she had done Memento. She’s a big editing star. I

met her in LA when I was doing Contraband, we had dinner together. We are very good friends

today. We just hit it. And, she contacted her agent and asked them to talk to me and sign me on.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Wow.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

And it happened, they signed me on.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

That’s amazing. So then, from that going forward you were now up for doing American films?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Yeah.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

That’s amazing. You are in the world of action films now. Your latest movie that’s coming out

soon is the new Marvel movie, which I was very excited to find out that you’re cutting it,

Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings. You did John Wick, Atomic Blonde, Deadpool 2.

High action, high Hollywood films. Was this a genre that you were always interested in? Tell me

about this action film journey.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I think it’s just interesting and fascinating how life guides you to a certain place. There are two

things. One is, I did a lot of dance movies in Iceland with an artist Helena Jonsdottir, who works

very much in Europe with dance movies. So, I was extremely accustom to editing choreography.

Action is choregraphy. It is a dance. No one gets hurt. It doesn’t look bloody and disgusting until

they put all the visual effects on it. It’s a dance. So, I had this massive dance choreography

editing training from doing small indie art dance films with my friend Helena. Another thing, I

worked on this TV show for a year, called LazyTown, but I learnt so much about working with

blue screen and imagining how things are happening in the background, and just the workflow

of it. So, I had a massive training from there through this children’s show.

So, when I did my first big action, which was John Wick, I had all those elements already.

I wasn’t learning anything… Of course, I learnt a lot doing that movie, but I had the basis coming

in. And then, you do get pigeonholed, people decide that. But, it’s not only that you get

pigeonholed, but also I now have a great experience working with big budget movies. The

workflow of them is a bit different and it’s sometimes extremely hectic. It’s difficult with visual

effects… Not difficult, but it’s just different. Especially with really heavy visual effects movies,

you have to work so tightly with visual effects and make all the dates. It’s a lot of work.

Especially in Deadpool, where we had animated characters, and again in Shang-Chi. It takes a lot

of time to do this stuff.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

What do you feel you bring that’s unique to these films?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I always try to bring a big heart. I think it’s a part of my job to be extremely critical of some stuff.

With action movies, are not just for 17 year old boys, and even if they were, there is no need to

degrade women in any way. So, I terrorized my directors talking about the male gaze [inaudible

00:13:23].

Sarah Taylor (Host):

I love it.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

By pushing it through, trying to make a change that way. But, every movie I work on, I look at my

work… I am kind of interpreting the work of so many people. If you imagine that you have a

script, it might be based on a book, so the script is an interpretation of a book that’s written, or

it’s an original script. But then, the whole crew, it’s the director, it’s the actors, the set designer,

everyone interprets that story into their art. For me, I gather all of it and then I try to interpret the

best version of the movie from what I have. I have such a respect for what everyone else brings

to the table. But, we also live in a world that’s extremely unjust, and racist, and misogynist, etc.

So, I try to remind myself of it every time I start working on a movie. I just go through the whole

cast, I go through the whole crew, the key positions in the crew, and I just think about that.

Especially if I have women or people of color, for example, in the cast. I try to remember

that I am not raised in a just society. So, I might have ideas that go against what these people

are bringing to the table, and I have to be aware of it. I ask my self, again, “Should I cut that

dialogue out? Why am I cutting it out?” Just so I have a fighting chance to work against my

possible prejudices.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

It’s such an important thing to hear, as an editor, and I think it’s an important thing for everybody

to hear, as filmmakers. That, those little things, we have control to help shape and hopefully

change our world. Hearing you be like, “I am going to be conscious and think,”…

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Sometimes it might be better for the movie and for them that I cut this dialogue. I just need to

be aware, “Why am I cutting it? Am I cutting it because it’s best for the movie? Or, am I cutting it

because I have some hidden prejudices about, ‘A woman would never say it like that’?” Then, I

have to question myself again, now I have to take a step back, “Why would I cut if it works for

the movie?” I’m a big believer in cutting dialogue left and right, I’m like, “[inaudible 00:16:09].” A

dialogue massacre. But, that’s because a dialogue in a script can be beautiful and it works

perfectly, but then you have the actors interpret that dialogue, and sometimes a whole speech

just comes with one look, and that speech becomes redundant. You don’t need it anymore

because the actor brought that look.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yeah, for sure.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I’m a big believer in cutting dialogue. I want to be aware why I’m doing it.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

What brought you to think like that?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I think that’s just how I’ve lived all my life, actually. I grew up through the feminist movement, I

was a very active young woman in the feminist second wave in Iceland. I just learnt a lot about

this stuff going through that. Just turning up in meetings, listening to talks. So, I think it came

early, this being aware that you are not living in a perfect society. It is a racist, misogynist

community we live in. Not the people, necessarily, it’s just we have built this society through

such a long time and it’s difficult to get rid of all the bad ideas we might have as a society. I’m

not talking about the individuals within it, they come in all sizes and shapes. You might grow up

just knowing that women’s voices are more annoying because they’re higher. As an editor, I have

to be aware that I might have that prejudice when I’m listening to dialogue, trying to deem which

take is best. You have to be aware that you might be… But, at the same time, you have to be

aware that the whole audience has the same prejudices. You just have to find the balance and

try not to…

What I absolutely do not want to do is step on women’s and minorities’ glory. I don’t want

to be the person that’s done that. I want people to flourish. Not that that’s in my power, I’m just

saying in my small bubble I try to do what I can.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Every small step is a good thing. You talked about how you like to cut dialogue, I liked the line, “A

dialogue massacre,” that’s great. Tell us more about your process. How do you start a film,

what’s your process of watching the dailies, when do you start cutting scenes? Just do a little

rundown of what you’re editing process is.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Usually, you turn up the day or the day before they start shooting, but you’ve read the script. I’ve

usually read it several times. Then, the shooting starts and you just get dailies every single day,

and you go through them. I watch them and try to remember what affected me watching it first

time, and I make some notes, then I start throwing the scene together. I do it very roughly. I don’t

necessarily do it with selects, I just throw the scene together like, “I want to be here, I want to go

there.” And then, I go through all the takes and see, “Do I have what it takes to fit into this form

that I’ve made?” Sometimes, it has to change a bit because of performances and how shots

were done [inaudible 00:19:55]. That’s how you eat this elephant, it’s one bite at a time. You

almost have a scene a day. And then, it strings up to a movie. That’s when it gets difficult for me

to hold back.

You have to edit this new scene that was shot today but, “Ooh, I want to dive into this.”

But, I try to stay focused and do my scenes every single day. Also, if anything is missing you can

notify the producers and the director. You might feel something’s missing or not covered well

enough. Even if you notify them, it doesn’t mean it’s shot, but at least you’ve notified them. And

then, at some point, you’ve got all the scenes and everything’s there, and then you just start.

Sometimes I work in sections. Sometimes, in the beginning especially, it’s good to work

in sections, get this section right, get that section right. I have a tendency, I just have to watch

the film again, and again, and again. I find it so important that what’s happening in scene 10 is

extremely important for what’s happening in 112, and you have to keep those connections going

the whole time. It’s one movie, it’s not 130 scenes, it’s one movie. That’s what you’re working

with.

Which, brings me also to why I dislike working with multiple editors. That has nothing to

do with most of the beautiful people I work with, but I do dislike the lack of understanding for

the art of editing, that it’s a singular vision. When you suddenly have three visions, or four

visions, it gets really difficult, for me. Also, because I’m a control freak.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

How has it worked for you, because you’ve worked on a few films where you’ve been in a team?

What do you get and how does it work?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

It hasn’t worked like that on the movies I’ve worked with, it floats around, goes back and forth.

For me, it’s not about editing a scene, it’s about editing a movie. It’s very difficult for me to step

out of that mode and just start thinking, “This is my scene, this is my part.” But, it’s not like that,

because then we talk about stuff, and we sit down, and we watch the movie, and we talk. But, I

wish they would fix schedules and allow the art of editing to flourish as a singular vision. Always

based on the director’s vision, it’s not [inaudible 00:22:49], it’s a singular vision in connection

with the director’s vision. I think the art of it and the flow of it, I just feel it all has to come

together.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

The films where you’ve had to work with a team, is it because of schedules, that the film needs

to get done so quickly that you need more hands-on-deck?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Some studios demand it, mainly because of schedule. It’s a lot of material for a very short time.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

But on Deadpool, for example, I just got sick. I ended up in the hospital.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Oh no.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I think I’m a method editor, because I got in such good forms when I was doing Atomic Blonde, I

was in the gym every day. That was really good. But then, I did Deadpool 2 and ended up with

stage 4 cancer, [inaudible 00:23:48].

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Oh no.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

But, I got cured. All is good.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Good, but whoa.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I had the best doctors, I was so lucky. Now, I’m working on a movie that has to do with faith and

luck, and I just lost my wallet yesterday and I’m thinking, “There’s something there,” maybe I’m a

method editor.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Other than the cancer thing, which I’m very sorry that happened, but… I find, because I do a lot of

documentary stuff, I will definitely get into… I did one about a boxer and then I was like, “I want

to take boxing.” And then, I did one for the tap dancing and I’m like, “I’m going to take tap

dancing.”

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Exactly. [inaudible 00:24:23].

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yeah, you just get into it. It’s their passion and you feel the passion.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

When I did John Wick, I got suited up.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Oh yeah?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Yeah.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

That’s amazing.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I had to have a good suit, that’s really, really helpful.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Do you still have that suit and do you still wear it?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Oh yeah, I do.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

I love it. I want to see the suit. That’s so fun. You said that you like to cut the film, but of the film,

what are your favorite types of scenes to edit?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I’m so fascinated by every single scene I have to tackle. Every scene brings you different

challenges and I’m just fascinated by all of them. I think they’re all just as fun. I think the easiest

scenes I edit are action scenes, actually. [inaudible 00:25:16] first, because I’ve been blessed

with amazing choreographers. Because, I don’t choreograph those fight scenes, someone else

does. I’ve just been lucky working with the best, both producers and directors that know action,

know what it takes to make action, and the choreographers and stunt people that know what

they’re doing. The best of the best. So, for me, editing action is just pure fun.

Dialogue is always more difficult because most people, I know there are exceptions, but

most people do not know how it is to end up in a shootout. Never been in a shootout. So, you

can kind of do whatever you like because who’s going to care? Who’s going to stand up and say,

“No, that’s wrong.” But, with dialogue, every single audience has had dialogue with someone, has

had discussions or arguments. Those are the trickiest scenes. I can spend hours because I

really want it to ring true, but it doesn’t take you out of the film, that this was a really [inaudible

00:26:25] dialogue scene. So, those are the trickiest scenes, but I do have fun doing all of them.

All of it is fun.

My favorite thing, is just watching it again, and again, and again. Both because you get

such a good understanding, I think I get a good understanding of the pace of it. But also, there

are just connections that you start understanding better, and then you can tighten it and make it

work so other people will notice them without watching something 400 times.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yeah. When you’re going through and you’re watching it again, and again, and again, are you

stepping back from the edit suite, watching it on a screen, just watching it? Or, are you still

sitting at your suite, making those adjustments as you go?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Both. I think it’s very healthy to do… My father is a painter, and when I was young and he was

painting, and sometimes he would take a mirror and look at his painting through the mirror. I

think this is what happens when you take your movie and you watch it in different settings. If it’s

in a screening room, or take it home, watch it on your computer. Which, is probably the way most

people are going to see it in the end anyway. Because, it gives you a different perspective.

Because, the painter uses the mirror to get a different perspective of the work he’s doing, and I

think for me, as an editor, getting a different perspective is… Changing scenario, changing the

format I’m looking at it.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

What do you do when you find that there is a challenging scene, as in you’re stumped, or it’s just

not flowing right, or the dialogue isn’t going right, is there anything that you do to make it

happen?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Yeah, I just go away. I just go have dinner with friends. Go watch a movie, go see art somewhere,

just do everything else. Because, that problem is still going to be there when you get back, but

you’re going to have more energy. You know how it is, sometimes just doing the dishes will give

you the best ideas. You just have to disconnect from the problem. It’s not going to go away. It’s

still in the back of your mind. And suddenly, you might get a solution.

I dream my movies. I dream edits, sometimes something cooler than I can actually do

myself, but I still have dreams about my projects. Actually, solutions have come when I’m

sleeping and I wake up and I have to write it down straight away because I realize, “Yes, that’s

how we’re going to do it.”

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yeah. I find, for myself, it’s in the shower or if I go for a run or something. Like, “I got to get back

to the edit suite, I found the thing.”

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Exactly.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

That’s awesome.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

And, I think it’s very important because, for me, editing… I can imagine writers being a bit in the

same position, because we’re a bit alone, but we have to take care of ourselves. Because, the

problem is, I could sit 20 hours without standing up. I’m just completely engulfed in what I’m

doing, and that’s not okay. I learnt it the hard way. It’s not okay. You have to set time for yourself.

Take lunch, take dinner, take a break. It’s very important because when you edit a movie, for me I

believe… I’m sure this is not true, because I have heard of a lot of blockbusters that were very

successful where people didn’t have much fun, but I do believe if you have fun… I think it’s

important. If you don’t have fun working on this movie, how do you expect the audience to have

fun? I think it’s so important because I think it shows. I think it shows on the film how people felt,

and you want people to enjoy what they’re watching. You don’t want them to feel like, “Oh, that

was weird.” You just want to ooze some heart into that movie. Enjoy. I think it’s important.

That’s why I think everyone in the production is just as important. Someone just bringing

coffee to set can bring such joy to the people working there that they actually really affect the

production, and [inaudible 00:31:06]. So, I think it’s extremely important to have a good crew and

a closely-knitted crew.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Do you have directors that you’ve with multiple times? That director-editor relationship I feel like

is really important. And, what you’re just mentioning now, having a connection with a director

and working on it as a team, that brings a heart to a film, if you have that good connection, that

good relationship.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Yeah, it does. I think it’s important. I’ve done so many movies with David Leitch, and I’m working

with him now on a new movie. I love getting to know new people, but yes, working with

someone, we know each other’s language, we know what we’re thinking. Of course it’s

important. It saves a lot of work and heartache. He knows I’m not going to go and piss off and

do something horrible. He can trust that I’m going to put the work in. We have kind of a

shorthand in dialogue as well. And, I really enjoy working with him as a director. He’s so open to

suggestions, even though he has a very clear vision of what he wants. He has the confidence to

be open to other ideas, even though he has a very strong vision of what he wants.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

I think that’s interesting to say that, because I feel like when somebody’s really, really rigid,

maybe it is this lack of confidence, or they’re not sure, or, “Maybe it won’t work, I don’t know.”

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

That’s how I feel about it.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

For yourself, throughout the years, you’ve been doing this for a while, have you found that you

have your own internal confidence now? When you were younger, getting feedback from

directors or producers, was it harder? How did you handle that and how do you handle it now?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I don’t think it was harder getting feedback from others, in connection with the movie. But, in the

old days, I could not screen anything I did, I was in the bathroom throwing up. Physically

throwing up because I was so stressed. That has gone.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Oh good.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I don’t feel that stressed anymore. I think that’s just you do it so many times you stop throwing

up at some point, thankfully. I think it’s extremely important to get notes. I don’t think anything

that has to do with the film can be ego filled in any way. You have to just try to take in the notes

and realize… But, you are the professional, so when you get notes from screenings and stuff,

you have to take a step back and look at them. You’re trying to figure out what people’s

problems are with the movie. You are the professional. They might not know, they might say, “We

hated the middle,” but the problem is actually in the beginning. You know what I mean?

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yeah, totally.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Because, if the beginning is too long, you’re going to be too tired in the middle. But, the audience

might say, “There’s a problem with the middle,” so you have to learn to take the notes and use

your own professionalism and experience to realize where is the problem. It takes a community

to make a film. I think that’s the biggest joy for me, is just the journey with that village to make

this movie, and that is the most inspiring thing about movie making, for me.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yeah. Being the editor, you’re often not with the crew, do you get to get to know the crew? Is that

something that you try to make an effort doing?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Sometimes, and sometimes not. It depends on so many things, like COVID. Usually you would be

in connection with the crew on set and visit regularly and stuff, but that changed this year.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

How has it been for you during COVID? Were you working on Shang-Chi during COVID?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Yeah, we were stuck in Australia, we were there for a year.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

What? Tell us.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I never knew I would live in Australia, but we ended up being there a year because of COVID.

Because, we had to stall production. We still kept working in post, and when we finished it had

been a year.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Wow. Originally, before COVID, you planned to go to Australia to cut the film while they were

shooting and then come back to Iceland?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

[inaudible 00:36:06] and finish. We were supposed to premier it February 3rd, was the first

premiere day on it.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Of 2021?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

2021, yeah. Last February.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Wow. At least Australia wasn’t as bad as America.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

No, that was not bad. It was just a surprise to be so far from your loved ones…

Sarah Taylor (Host):

No kidding.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

… And your routines.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yeah, especially during a pandemic.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Australians are very pleasant people. We were in Sydney the whole time, and just some precious

people I met there.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

And, you were working with a team of editors for that film as well?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Yeah.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

So, were you all staying together and you’re able to really work on the process of stuff actually

together?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

[inaudible 00:36:54], we [inaudible 00:36:57] in and did some great work in Australia.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

I look forward to seeing that one. Now, you’re working on another film, are you working at it from

home, in Iceland?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I am working from home. We were supposed to be working in Vancouver, and COVID, so in the

end they said, “We’ll be working from home in LA.” But, I pointed out, “Home for me is Iceland,”

but they accepted and said, “Okay, take it.”

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Amazing.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

So, I’ve been working from home since February.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Typically, non-COVID days, would you just be going back from Iceland to LA or wherever the film

might be shooting, and you’re just always on the go?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Yeah.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

That must have been an adjustment.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I’m getting old, I’m getting tired by it. But also, I got the taste of it now, just to be home and work

from home. I like the idea. We’ll see what the future brings.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yeah. In the meantime, working from home, how has that been going for you, working remotely?

Has it been an easy transition?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

It’s been going really well. The biggest surprise, when COVID hit, is that all those pipelines to

work from home were already in place. They’re all in place. You just have to plug in and press

play. It was all there. So, that was probably the biggest surprise. Maybe independent movies

used it more, but the studios are very protective of their material, so usually everything is locked

inside the studios, so it was a bit of a surprise. But, a good surprise. It’s been easy, I like it.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

What are some things that you need to have in your edit suite that help you do your best work?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I love to make it a bit cozy. I need to have the photos of my babies, or my children. I plaster my

wall with them, just so I can have a conversation sometimes with them. For me, it’s extremely

important that the editing is a sacred land. You cannot fight. If producers and directors want to

fight about something, let’s step outside, because it’s not a fight zone. This is a creative zone

where we talk about ideas. We can argue about ideas, but there is no fighting. That has to

happen outside the editing room. I just find it very important. It’s like the [inaudible 00:39:35] and

it has to be peaceful. I like to bring in some smells and candles and stuff.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Do you have a certain routine every day, that you get up in the morning, and you get to work at a

certain time, and you have coffee, anything like that that keeps your day going?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Yeah, always coffee and sit down. But again, it’s so different because of COVID, everything has

been different, we’re in different places, different timezones. It’s not the same. But, I do like

having our morning meetings, sit down and talk over what happened, what do we need to do. I

miss that. I miss my film community. But, I still keep the coffee routine going strong.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

It’s very important.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Very important.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Do you find that there’s a certain part of the day that you do certain activities or certain tasks at

certain times of day? Or, you just go with whatever the edit tells you to do?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Whatever the edit tell me to do. For me, I wouldn’t be able to be that organized. I just follow. But,

I do love early mornings, because usually that’s the most quiet time. So, I like that. I like early

mornings, with my coffee, few people around, if any, and just me time. I like that.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Mm-hmm (affirmative).

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

But, it tends to be very long days anyway.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yeah, for sure. How does it feel when you’ve finished a film? It’s locked, what are your feelings

and your thoughts when that happens?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I don’t think anyone that I’ve worked with would send anything out if we weren’t proud of the

product. It can be different genres and different movies, but this is the best version we could

come up with, and we are proud of the work we put in it, we can put it out. So, it feels good, but

you’re also nervous because you never know how anything is going to be received. Even though

you think, “This is going to be big,” and then it doesn’t become… You never know.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Yeah.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

So, you’re kind of sending it out without knowing what’s going to happen to it. But, it always feels

good because it’s work well done. Everyone has put their best foot down. Again, it’s a group

effort, and you’re just there with a group of people that have been spending so much time on it,

and sending it off, and then it’s gone. But, that’s not how it is for the director and some of the

actors, because then they follow it to the film festivals, to whatever. But, we have to say

goodbye.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Do you have one film that you’re most proud of? Can you pick one?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I’m so proud of so many movies. I am obsessive as well. Very obsessive. I do have an obsessive

character. The film I’m working on now, it has all my energy. It’s the only thing I can think about.

Favorite movie would always be the movie I’m working on.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

That’s great. Do you have any tips for young editors or editors that are trying to make a career

transition into doing film? Scripted, as opposed to documentary? Anything like that.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

First thing, I think it’s important that there shouldn’t be a hierarchy here. Especially when it

comes to documentary, it’s such an amazing art form for me, I do love it. I’ve done some

documentaries. I wish I could do more. I think the most important thing is to always put all your

best out there, whatever you’re doing. The size of the budget doesn’t matter. You have to do your

best. I think if you always put your best foot down… Don’t write something off as bullshit,

because some things can just flourish and become something that comes back to you in the

form of a job opportunity, or something else. So, always put your best foot forward.

But again, I just find it so important that all of us understand this is work. It might be

ideal work, amazing work, so much fun work, but it’s work. We have to remember to take care of

ourselves. If we don’t take care of ourselves we won’t be able to make those movies. So, just

take care of yourself, be brave, and always, always, always take the dialogue. I think it’s

extremely important to be brave. I know it’s so hard right now, because there are so many people

and few opportunities. I’m sure so many people are getting, “No,” that shouldn’t be getting noes.

But, you have to remember that this is what you’re fighting against, so few opportunities. So, just

don’t give up. Or, give up. But, if you decide to not to give up, don’t give up. Just keep going with

that smile. But, it’s also okay to give up and to go to something else. That’s the beauty of life. It

just leads you to something else. Just don’t ever, ever, ever give up. Change direction if you feel

you need to, but just don’t give up.

And, I think it’s important to remember that there are so many editors out there, and

probably most of them better than I am. I’m also blessed with opportunities, but that’s one part

of being anything. You have to be able to grab the opportunity when they present themselves.

So, be open to opportunities. And again, that can be in a very small budget short film

somewhere, so do not cut corners because it’s a low budget short film. Give it all, because that

might come back to you as an opportunity. It’s tough out there, I know.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

That’s good advice. Do you have any films coming up? We’ve talked about the Shang-Chi and the

Legend of the Ten Rings, but anything else coming up that you want to tell us about?

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Yeah, I’m very proud of Kate, who’s going to be in September as well on Netflix. It’s a small

movie, but I had so much fun working it. And then, I’m working on Bullet Train. That’s probably

not going to come out until Christmas. Maybe it’s going to be a Christmas movie.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Awesome. Thank you so much for taking the time to chat with me. You had such great insight

and lots of good one-liners that I’m going to try to take and put them in my pocket. Eating the

elephant one scene at a time, I love it.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I didn’t know this, but maybe I’m the queen of one-liners.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

I think so.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

I’m happy you enjoyed it. I enjoyed it.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Thank you so much. Take care, bye.

Elísabet Ronaldsdóttir (Guest):

Take care, bye.

Sarah Taylor (Host):

Thank you so much for joining us today, and a big thank you goes out to Jane MacRae. The

main title sound design was created by Jane Tattersall, additional ADR recording by Andrea

Rusch. Original music provided by Chad Blain. This episode was mixed and mastered by Tony

Bao.

The CCE has been supporting Indspire, an organization that provides funding and

scholarships for indigenous post-secondary students. We have a permanent portal on our

website at cceditors.ca, or you can donate directly to indspire.ca. I-N-D-S-P-I-R-E.ca. The CCE is

taking steps to build a more equitable ecosystem within our industry, and we encourage our

members to participate in any way they can. If you’ve enjoyed this podcast, please rate and

review us on Apple Podcasts and tell your friends to tune in. Till next time, I’m your host, Sarah

Taylor.

Speaker 4:

The CCE is a non-profit organization, with the goal of bettering the art and science of picture

editing. If you wish to become a CCE member, please visit our website www.cceditors.ca. Join

our great community of Canadian editors for more related info.

Subscribe Wherever You Get Your Podcasts

What do you want to hear on The Editors Cut?

Please send along any topics you would like us to cover or editors you would love to hear from:

Credits

A special thanks goes to

Jane MacRae

Hosted and Produced by

Sarah Taylor

Main Title Sound Design by

Jane Tattersall

ADR Recording by

Andrea Rusch

Mixed and Mastered by

Tony Bao

Original Music by

Chad Blain

Sponsor Narration by

Paul Winestock

Categories
Articles Members

Communications Coordinator

Communications Coordinator

Communication Coordinator / Coordonnateur·trice des communications

Job title: Communications Coordinator (English/French)

Type: Contract, Remote, Flexible hours

Start Date: September 1, 2021

Hours of work: Approx. 50 hours/month, more as needed

Compensation: $20/hour

The Canadian Cinema Editors (CCE) is a professional, educational and cultural association. Our mission is to:

  • Support the pursuit of artistic and technological pre-eminence, and excellence in post production
  • Promote the education of peers, producers and students in the art and science of editing
  • Bring together editors who share a common desire to advance the dignity and prestige of the profession
  • Showcase the achievements of our members to Canada and the world
  • Achieve recognition for, and elevation of, editors as authoritative storytellers

We are a non-profit organization with the goal of bettering the art and science of picture editing in all media. We are proud to welcome people of all races, genders, class, sexuality, ages and abilities who share the desire to tell great stories. We strive to be more inclusive in all our activities, and build a more equitable ecosystem within our industry. Through a better understanding of each other, and teaching others in our industry, we hope to advance the profile of professional film editors.

The Canadian Cinema Editors is searching for a proactive, passionate and creative individual to join our team as a Communications Coordinator. This individual will have strong copywriting skills in English or French with a working knowledge of the other language, strong experience designing branded graphics, experience with Mailchimp, experience managing social media campaigns, and a general knowledge of the Canadian film and television industry. This position will execute the CCE’s communications strategy, including managing the organization’s social media channels, manage the monthly e-newsletter, and handle communications for the CCE’s events, podcasts, initiatives and activities.

This is a part-time, contract, remote-work position, with room for growth within the organization. Hours of work are flexible, but the Communications Coordinator will occasionally be required to attend CCE Board or Committee meetings, which take place in the evenings. The initial contract will be for a 6-month trial period.

ACCOUNTABILITIES/RESPONSIBILITIES:

DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS & WEBSITE MANAGEMENT

  • Working with the Operations Manager, write, build, send and manage the CCE’s e-newsletter Main release once a month, smaller campaigns scattered throughout the year
  • Working with the Communications Chair and Operations Manager, write blog articles/content for CCE website
  • In conjunction with the CCE Board, the Operations Manager, and third-party developer, maintain the CCE website’s events using the Modern Event Calendar Plugin
  • In conjunction with the CCE Board, provide press release support for events and initiatives

SOCIAL MEDIA

  • Following the CCE’s communication strategy, build and execute communication campaigns to support various CCE events, podcasts, our members, sponsor relationships, programs and initiatives
  • This includes: writing copy, designing graphics, working with Operations Manager to secure translation, scheduling posts, & monitoring engagement rate
  • Oversee the CCE’s social media platforms and engage with our followers
  • Work with communications committee to build and execute a pre-approved year long content calendar 
  • This includes: national awareness days, reporting on member nominees/winners of awards, and the art & science of picture editing
  • Work with the Operations Manager to stay up-to-date with CCE member news to promote on CCE’s social platforms
  • Using Buffer, Facebook, and other tools to collect, interpret, and report on the CCE’s social media statistics once monthly to Communications Chair
  • Live social media support during CCE events and programs (on evenings and weekends as required)

QUALIFICATIONS

  • Excellent writing, editing and proofreading skills in English or French – with working knowledge of the other language
  • Strong graphic design skills, with experience using Adobe Creative Suite tools
  • Strong organizational skills with the ability to proactively manage timelines and meet deadlines
  • Ability to work independently, take initiative, and assume responsibility with minimal supervision
  • Effective collaborator within a remote team environment
  • Minimum two years of relevant work experience
  • Post-secondary degree, preferably in Communications, Marketing, Public Relations or equivalent
  • A commitment to fostering equity, inclusion and diversity in Canada’s film industry
  • Experience with WordPress, Elementor Pro, Yoast SEO and other plugins an asset (or willingness to learn)
  • Knowledge of social media metrics (Buffer/Facebook analytics) an asset
  • Knowledge of the Canadian film and TV industry an asset
  • Written and spoken bilingualism (English/French) is an asset
  • Applicants must be a Canadian citizen or permanent resident, and able to work in Canada.

HOW TO APPLY

Interested candidates must submit a cover letter, resume with references, and three (3) writing and design samples to info@cceditors.ca by August 13, 2021 and indicate “CCE Communications Coordinator” in the subject line. Applications without all required components will not be considered.

We thank all interested applicants; however, only qualified candidates will be contacted for an interview.

Categories
Articles Members

Congratulations: 2021 Emmy Award Nominations

2021 Emmy Award Nominations

2021 Emmy Award Nominations Finalistes pour les prix Emmy 2021

Congratulations to Wendy Hallam Martin, ACE, CCE who was nominated for an Emmy Award for THE HANDMAID'S TALE: THE CROSSING.

en_CAEN

stay connected

Subscribe to our mailing list to
receive updates, news and offers

Skip to content