Avid/UCLA Dedication

Director-Editor Relationships
Discussed at Digital Dedication

Talk Quickly Turns to Schedules at Avid/UCLA event

by Sharon Smith-Holley & Mark Phillips

To dedicate the new Avid/UCLA editing center,
a panel discussion was held. The panel consisted
of six director-editor teams:

Gilbert Cates & Millie Moore
Jeremiah Chechik & Carol Littleton
Richard Donner & Richard Marks
John Frankenheimer & Paul Rubell
Albert Hughes & Dan Lebenthal
Martha Coolidge & Steven Cohen

Melnitz Theater was engulfed by a giant, towering Avid screen during the recent Avid Editing Laboratory dedication at the UCLA campus. Audience members were reduced to the size of trims as editor Mike Sale demonstrated some basic manipulations. Then Robert Rosen, Chair of UCLA's Department of Film and Television, introduced the impressive panel which consisted of several director-editor pairs: DGA President Gilbert Cates and Millie Moore; Jeremiah Chechik and Carol Littleton; Richard Donner and Richard Marks; John Frankenheimer and Paul Rubell; Albert Hughes and Dan Lebenthal; and Martha Coolidge and Steven Cohen, director and editor, respectively, of 'Lost in Yonkers,' the first feature cut entirely on the Avid.

Moderator Jeremy Kagan delicately stated that the director-editor relationship is a magical and private one--" a marriage that takes away from your spouse"--and asked the panelists how they began working with each other.

Richard Marks joked that "Dick hired me because our names are the same," but continued, "Lauren [Schuler-Donner] had always wanted me to meet him." Lauren had worked with Marks on 'Pretty in Pink' and 'St. Elmo's Fire' and Donner's previous editor, Stuart Baird, was unavailable.

Martha Coolidge talked about her various relationships with editors, both good and bad before she met Steven Cohen. "I screened some of his work. I've found there are people who cut in a way that drives me crazy and some that cut the way I like."

John Frankenheimer said he needed a second editor on 'The Burning Season' and felt a great sense of "'simpatico', trust, and a gut feeling that he wanted to be around Paul Rubell. "He cut the second half of the picture practically without any guidance from me." Paul said that meeting John was the luckiest day of his career.

Albert Hughes joked that "I had to test drive Dan with a music video before we bought him."

The panelists were asked to explore the positive and negative aspects of electronic editing within the relationship. Gilbert Cates said he felt that the speed wasn't that important, but he was always embarrassed to ask an editor to try something wild because of all the splices. Now "it's great because you can go back to an earlier version easily."

Steven Cohen felt "the Avid improves the collaborative process." There used to be a lot of tension in a cutting-room sometimes, because the editor was reluctant to tear a cut apart, thinking,"Please don't expect me to put it back, I don't think I'll remember how."

Director Jeremiah Chechik said electronic editing allows an uncensored exploration of ideas and "celebrates the virtue of indecision." He doesn't believe it saves time but said,"Once you go back into a massive scene with a lot of cuts, it helps to go through the film and it also lessens the fear of a disintegrating print during the first preview."

"It's a good tool for terrorizing assistants," Dan Lebenthal teased. "Making them choose which version is better."

Carol Littleton said she feels that the Avid is an extraordinary tool and"the level of self-censorship has changed. During the first encounter with the film you have an opportunity to see all the choices." She also felt that editing is enhanced by the availability of material and the ability to judge quickly.

Martha Coolidge said she feels that the Avid makes the editing process about ideas not about mechanics. "If you are on a normal schedule, it makes the day more intense but the days shorter. The machine is so fast you don't even have time to make a phone call while the editor makes the cuts." But she added,"I think electronic editing is used as an excuse by the studios. They were trying to shorten schedules before electronic editing. What does it mean, speed? It's faster to make changes but does it make the cutting better?" She believes that the great ideas that come to you in week 8 or 9 will still only come to you in week 8 or 9. Gilbert Cates agreed that the amount of time he spends in the cutting-room hasn't changed because ideas still need time to develop.

Jeremiah Chechik said,"There are pressures from the studio to have a more finished film sooner. It's like giving a word processor to a novelist and saying, 'You're not using a pen and paper so you can write it faster.' Yes, it's faster to make changes. But it gives you less time to look at the whole movie and let the nuances reveal themselves."

"I used to live on dupes, cut dupes into the color ... tear that apart. And a terrible thing used to happen - you leave the editor to do something, then it's hard to get back into the scene again. Avid saves all that work with an expedience that tunes your instincts," said Richard Donner. Richard Marks revealed that having this "better mousetrap" encourages him to experiment and that his relationship with his director is enhanced because he doesn't have to send him away for days while he recuts. However, he stressed that there are many false expectations that faster=better=smarter and stressed that we still need our thinking time.

John Frankenheimer couldn't think of a disadvantage and stated that the Avid answered all of his needs and was a"boon" to his life. "I shoot a tremendous amount of film," he continued, "'Andersonville' had 2,500 individual shots." His editor, Paul Rubell said the Avid helps organize dailies and the massive amount of footage.

Albert Hughes felt that as fast as he could have an idea, Dan made it happen, leaving more time to play video games during breaks. But he added,"I could be creatively spent after six hours."

Millie Moore said that it's also physically a lot easier on the editor. To her the biggest advantage, however, is that now she can do a temp dub, filling in the sound effects and music. " The Avid can make your work appear more finished." Carol Littleton agreed. Richard Marks, on the other hand, said he likes to leave the sound to the effects editors.

Carol described how her eyesight took a dive during her first electronic show. "It's a personal aspect but it's important." Her doctor advised her to take breaks, and to use No-Rad screens.

As the discussion drew to a close, an audience member asked whether the ease of digital editing has led to a decreased dependency of the director upon the editor. Frankenheimer, who confessed that he would not want to be his own editor, believed that the machine hasn't changed his relationship at all stressing that an instinctual communication must exist with his editor. Richard Donner gracefully concluded that he is still dependent upon his editor to lead him down a path.

When this article was written, Mark Phillips was assisting on 'Phenomenon'
and Sharon Smith Holley was assisting on 'The Legend of Mulan.'

Reprinted from
The Motion Picture Editors Guild Newsletter
Vol. 17, No. 3 - May/June 1996.

Guild Home | Newsletter Home | Top of Page

Copyright © 1996, All Rights Reserved by The Motion Picture Editors Guild, IATSE Local 776


	Director-Editor Relationships Discussed at Digital Dedication Talk Quickly Turns to Schedules at Avid/UCLA event by Sharon Smith-Holley & Mark Phillips To dedicate the new Avid/UCLA editing center, a panel discussion was held. The panel consisted of six director-editor teams: Gilbert Cates & Millie Moore Jeremiah Chechik & Carol Littleton Richard Donner & Richard Marks John Frankenheimer & Paul Rubell Albert Hughes & Dan Lebenthal Martha Coolidge & Steven Cohen
		Melnitz Theater was engulfed by a giant, towering Avid screen during the recent Avid Editing Laboratory dedication at the UCLA campus. Audience members were reduced to the size of trims as editor Mike Sale demonstrated some basic manipulations. Then Robert Rosen, Chair of UCLA's Department of Film and Television, introduced the impressive panel which consisted of several director-editor pairs: DGA President Gilbert Cates and Millie Moore; Jeremiah Chechik and Carol Littleton; Richard Donner and Richard Marks; John Frankenheimer and Paul Rubell; Albert Hughes and Dan Lebenthal; and Martha Coolidge and Steven Cohen, director and editor, respectively, of 'Lost in Yonkers,' the first feature cut entirely on the Avid. Moderator Jeremy Kagan delicately stated that the director-editor relationship is a magical and private one--" a marriage that takes away from your spouse"--and asked the panelists how they began working with each other. Richard Marks joked that "Dick hired me because our names are the same," but continued, "Lauren [Schuler-Donner] had always wanted me to meet him." Lauren had worked with Marks on 'Pretty in Pink' and 'St. Elmo's Fire' and Donner's previous editor, Stuart Baird, was unavailable. Martha Coolidge talked about her various relationships with editors, both good and bad before she met Steven Cohen. "I screened some of his work. I've found there are people who cut in a way that drives me crazy and some that cut the way I like." John Frankenheimer said he needed a second editor on 'The Burning Season' and felt a great sense of "'simpatico', trust, and a gut feeling that he wanted to be around Paul Rubell. "He cut the second half of the picture practically without any guidance from me." Paul said that meeting John was the luckiest day of his career. Albert Hughes joked that "I had to test drive Dan with a music video before we bought him." The panelists were asked to explore the positive and negative aspects of electronic editing within the relationship. Gilbert Cates said he felt that the speed wasn't that important, but he was always embarrassed to ask an editor to try something wild because of all the splices. Now "it's great because you can go back to an earlier version easily." Steven Cohen felt "the Avid improves the collaborative process." There used to be a lot of tension in a cutting-room sometimes, because the editor was reluctant to tear a cut apart, thinking,"Please don't expect me to put it back, I don't think I'll remember how." Director Jeremiah Chechik said electronic editing allows an uncensored exploration of ideas and "celebrates the virtue of indecision." He doesn't believe it saves time but said,"Once you go back into a massive scene with a lot of cuts, it helps to go through the film and it also lessens the fear of a disintegrating print during the first preview." "It's a good tool for terrorizing assistants," Dan Lebenthal teased. "Making them choose which version is better." Carol Littleton said she feels that the Avid is an extraordinary tool and"the level of self-censorship has changed. During the first encounter with the film you have an opportunity to see all the choices." She also felt that editing is enhanced by the availability of material and the ability to judge quickly. Martha Coolidge said she feels that the Avid makes the editing process about ideas not about mechanics. "If you are on a normal schedule, it makes the day more intense but the days shorter. The machine is so fast you don't even have time to make a phone call while the editor makes the cuts." But she added,"I think electronic editing is used as an excuse by the studios. They were trying to shorten schedules before electronic editing. What does it mean, speed? It's faster to make changes but does it make the cutting better?" She believes that the great ideas that come to you in week 8 or 9 will still only come to you in week 8 or 9. Gilbert Cates agreed that the amount of time he spends in the cutting-room hasn't changed because ideas still need time to develop. Jeremiah Chechik said,"There are pressures from the studio to have a more finished film sooner. It's like giving a word processor to a novelist and saying, 'You're not using a pen and paper so you can write it faster.' Yes, it's faster to make changes. But it gives you less time to look at the whole movie and let the nuances reveal themselves." "I used to live on dupes, cut dupes into the color ... tear that apart. And a terrible thing used to happen - you leave the editor to do something, then it's hard to get back into the scene again. Avid saves all that work with an expedience that tunes your instincts," said Richard Donner. Richard Marks revealed that having this "better mousetrap" encourages him to experiment and that his relationship with his director is enhanced because he doesn't have to send him away for days while he recuts. However, he stressed that there are many false expectations that faster=better=smarter and stressed that we still need our thinking time. John Frankenheimer couldn't think of a disadvantage and stated that the Avid answered all of his needs and was a"boon" to his life. "I shoot a tremendous amount of film," he continued, "'Andersonville' had 2,500 individual shots." His editor, Paul Rubell said the Avid helps organize dailies and the massive amount of footage. Albert Hughes felt that as fast as he could have an idea, Dan made it happen, leaving more time to play video games during breaks. But he added,"I could be creatively spent after six hours." Millie Moore said that it's also physically a lot easier on the editor. To her the biggest advantage, however, is that now she can do a temp dub, filling in the sound effects and music. " The Avid can make your work appear more finished." Carol Littleton agreed. Richard Marks, on the other hand, said he likes to leave the sound to the effects editors. Carol described how her eyesight took a dive during her first electronic show. "It's a personal aspect but it's important." Her doctor advised her to take breaks, and to use No-Rad screens. As the discussion drew to a close, an audience member asked whether the ease of digital editing has led to a decreased dependency of the director upon the editor. Frankenheimer, who confessed that he would not want to be his own editor, believed that the machine hasn't changed his relationship at all stressing that an instinctual communication must exist with his editor. Richard Donner gracefully concluded that he is still dependent upon his editor to lead him down a path.
	When this article was written, Mark Phillips was assisting on 'Phenomenon' and Sharon Smith Holley was assisting on 'The Legend of Mulan.' Reprinted from The Motion Picture Editors Guild Newsletter Vol. 17, No. 3 - May/June 1996. Guild Home \| Newsletter Home \| Top of Page Copyright © 1996, All Rights Reserved by The Motion Picture Editors Guild, IATSE Local 776