How do REAL directors and editors deal with continuity in these cases?

I

ironpony

Carbonite Member
A lot of times in successful movies, if you watch the deleted scenes, they delete sections of scenes, where just a few sentences or even only a few words of dialogue are removed. But if I decide that that sentence or two is cheesy and redundant, and want to cut it, then the continuity is thrown off. Let's say Character A says a sentence, I feel needs to be cut. I will cut the sentence, and have it cut to Character B, who A is talking too. Then I will cut back to Character A, and all of a sudden A is in a different position, like his armed is rested and he's leaned back, instead slouched forward, like before. It's awkward cause only a second or two went by in between cuts, and he's all of a sudden in a different position. Doesn't look right, compared to better movies. But how do the real filmmakers avoid that, cause it seems that it happens almost every time, unless I get lucky.

Of course I've always read to get plenty of coverage, which I have done, but even so, in all the coverage, the positions may not match any, to the shots you want to edit back to.
 
Last edited:
Coverage helps certainly, but sometimes you need to cut to something entirely different to get away with it. In Dov Simens' filmmaking course he calls it "the cat in the window". In other words some footage of the location that doesn't (necessarily) include either actor. I might be a book on a table they referred to, something cooking in the kitchen...anything that feels acceptable to 'bridge' the awkward edit. It can also be something off-location, like an image of a situation elsewhere they're referring to etc. Whatever works. The main idea is that detailed coverage of the location and props as well as "b-roll" from everywhere (and just about anywhere) will be very useful in these situations.

Failing that, you could hold longer on one or the other of the actors, but I'd guess you've already tried this and found it didn't work. Another alternative is to explore using other pix takes with the audio from the one you chose. An OTS shot can often be used of someone listening even with pretty severe lip-sync mismatching on the (mostly unseen) foreground actor.

Then there's the basic lesson of continuity-awareness of course. But almost everyone runs into problems with that from time to time. Sometimes pickup shoots are the only answer.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I got coverage for cutaways. But as soon as you cut back, the other actor is in a different position completely. So cutting away is only half the solution it seems.
 
Well, those are pretty much your solutions aside from something more drastic like cutting away to something else entirely while the dialog continues (like the next scene), or intercutting it with another scene to break it up. Sounds like a serious continuity problem that should have been caught on set. No prefabricated solutions to that. You gotta do the best you can, with the last resort being a reshoot. But I bet you can find a solution short of that if you try hard enough.

Could you post a clip of the scene or the part of it that's problematic? Maybe one of us will have a flash of inspiration.
 
Does you no good now, but going forward, don't let the talent move on a line. Move, deliver line, move. Never move WHILE delivering the line.

If you had done this you would have the beat at the end of the delivery of the line, just before he moved to the new position, and you would cut to there.
 
Hi there gonzo_entertainment.

I've gotta say I don't agree with the idea of not letting talent move on a line, look at a film like The Shining, would this scene (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n47U-v3v1-Q ) have been better if Jack Nicholson had stood still? You don't need to hobble the actors, what you need is a good script supervisor.

i've worked as a script supervisor for four years, during filming I will take notes, watching every move and action, then when we go to the next shot I make sure the actions are repeated ("sorry, you can't say that line yet, you don't say that until you get to the third stair from the top" that's something I ended up saying to an actor a few films ago).

Mr. Spencer, I'm also not sure about the idea that this continuity error should have been picked up on set. The way I read the OPs post, he is trying to delete a section of a scene and that is what is causing the problems. However if he left that section in, it would cut perfectly. If this is true then it is not something that could have been spotted on set. Return of the Jedi has something like this, briefly you can see Vader holding Luke's lightsaber, a moment later Luke ignites it and starts fighting, this is because of a deleted scene where he threw the saber to Vader and then snatched it back. The script supervisor had no way of knowing this scene would be cut, so from her perspective continuity was maintained.

If however I misread the OP and the footage just goes from sitting to standing for no reason, then yeah that's a big error and should have been spotted.

However that just brings me back to how important a good script supervisor is. I know I may sound like a broken record or self promoting, but I've just seen so many filmmakers who are unaware that scriptys even exist, let alone how much they can help the final edit of a film.
 
If we have established - in which way ever - that a character moves either in the original position or in a given room, we may be able to make his "off movements" part of our storytelling. If we have the material, we maybe can actually enhance the effect, give it meaning, make the "mistake" a statement. I found it extremely helpful, especially with long scenes that may read good but where one doesn't really know if they work until the very end (in the editing room that is), to plan in advance and not only by coverage but by trying to find elements of storytelling that not only may save my behind, but may add to the story.

And when in danger make decisions with your editor and really "hack" a scene. Just saved my behind in a scene in a bowling ally by making the stupid repetition of the machines sorting the pins and the robotic mechanism of the old machinery a tool of giving the scene a rhythm and getting away from a linear time-line within the scene. We reduced a 4 minutes scene we had to shoot with the principal actors in only three extreme long shots to a mere 2'20. The rule is: There are rules but in any emergency no rules apply. Have a good and courageous editor. Slash the material and let it bleed. Continuity is for pussy's... ;-))) (no, not really, just sayin)
 
That's true I started looking through what I've edited so far, and so far the continuity is not too bad. I mean sure a person will have his arm in a position, then cut to another actor, then cut back and the arm is all of a sudden in a different position. Or someone is leaning forward, then all of a sudden back when I cut back. But I mean... with some smooth editing it doesn't look too bad I guess. My friends say it's fine and a lot of movies are like that but I just don't notice. But Gonzo's tip, not moving on a line sounds like good advice for next time.
 
I agree, a script supervisor (preferably a good one) is a must, but they wouldn't have helped him here. It's not a "last take his arm was in this position" kind of thing.

I get what you're saying, and yes there are situations where moving on a line is fine even preferable, HOWEVER, I would contend a conversation where you know you are going to be cutting together a bunch of coverage is not that time.
 
Rehease and block the scene with the actors. They should be able to learn and repeat their lines and movements together.

Shooting two camera helps out too. You'll always have something synced to cut away to.
 
Reddkryten said:
Mr. Spencer, I'm also not sure about the idea that this continuity error should have been picked up on set. The way I read the OPs post, he is trying to delete a section of a scene and that is what is causing the problems.
Click to expand...

After re-reading the OP, you're clearly right. Apologies to you and ironpony for forgetting that aspect of it (several hours after I'd read it initially and responded the first time).

Thanks also for your thoughtful post on the importance Scriptys. Sounds like you're quite on the ball with all of that : )
 
The only thing I'd add here (in general, not necessarily as it applies to ironpony's problem) is to beware of too-rigid blocking/physical acting. Overconcern with it can lead to very noticeably 'planned' looking performances; every move, gesture, raised eyebrow etc. is mapped and memorized - and looks it on camera. No one (aside perhaps from conmen and other professional liars) does that in real life. So I say: continuity yes, but within reason. The actors must be allowed to be alive in their performances at least to a degree that doesn't wreck continuity (like magically de/re-materializing several steps up on the staircase, as Reddkryten described). Only one take of any given moment will end up on the screen (with rare exceptions), so don't compromise the magic of *all of them* by overly enslaving oneself to the 'god of continuity'.

My $.02
 
No, you can't turn actors into robots, but there is nothing wrong with, during the blocking run through saying, 'Hey Bob, do me a favor, deliver the line THEN pick up the coffee cup, Don't say the line as you pick it up".

Nothing is written in stone, doesn't have to be done this way 100% of the time, just a good habit to get into that will prevent you from getting into editing nightmares like the OP describes. It's like crossing dialogue, are there times you have to do it, or that it works so much better you feel compelled to do it, sure. However, you just have to be aware OK, by letting them cross dialogue I am putting extreme limitations on how the editor will be able to deal with this scene.
 
gonzo_entertainment said:
No, you can't turn actors into robots, but there is nothing wrong with, during the blocking run through saying, 'Hey Bob, do me a favor, deliver the line THEN pick up the coffee cup, Don't say the line as you pick it up".

Nothing is written in stone, doesn't have to be done this way 100% of the time, just a good habit to get into that will prevent you from getting into editing nightmares like the OP describes. It's like crossing dialogue, are there times you have to do it, or that it works so much better you feel compelled to do it, sure. However, you just have to be aware OK, by letting them cross dialogue I am putting extreme limitations on how the editor will be able to deal with this scene.
Click to expand...

I don't quite get it though. What difference does it make if 'Bob' picks up the coffee cup before or after or the line. He picked it up and the scene cuts away from that either way, so what difference does it make?
 
Now the movement and line are disconnected. I can cut the line (or the next 10 lines), but still get him to his new position without jump cutting.
 
but they wouldn't have helped him here. It's not a "last take his arm was in this position" kind of thing
Click to expand...

I'm still not sure I see the problem here or how it's different. I recently did a scene where an actor was walking around a pool table, I just kept note of where he was on what word (bottom left-Hello, middle pocket-how are, top left-you). I just made sure the movement was consistent across all of the coverage. Is there any other reason to avoid this?


Thanks also for your thoughtful post on the importance Scriptys. Sounds like you're quite on the ball with all of that : )
Click to expand...

Thank you, that's quite a compliment :)


beware of too-rigid blocking/physical acting. Overconcern with it can lead to very noticeably 'planned' looking performances
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Sometimes I end up asking myself "if I fix this actors continuity issue, will I be helping the edit or harming the performance" if I think it will, then I'll usually go to the director and explain that the scene can be edited here, here and here, but not there, there and there. After that we can discuss if that is okay, or if we need to get any cutaways to patch things together.


I don't quite get it though. What difference does it make if 'Bob' picks up the coffee cup before or after or the line.
Click to expand...

The magical coffee cup. Frequently, things will be visible from multiple angles, I recently watched an episode of The L Word, where a character walked in (wide shot) and took off her glasses…cut to the reverse angle, glasses still on, cut to her closeup and they vanished again. Throughout the scene these glasses kept appearing and disappearing like something out of Harry Potter. That's why it's important to know what line of dialogue the change occurred on, so when you go to film another angle, you can say "the glasses are still on" or "The glasses would be off by now."


Imagine this scene, a character A is putting on a coat. The dialogue is


A: I'm leaving
B: Wait, stay
A: I can't
B: But why
A: There's nothing for me here


In some of the takes, the actor could put the coat on after "leaving", in others the coat may go on after "here". If that's not kept consistent, then when edited you've got a magical vanishing coat.
 
^Not enough attention has been paid to these kinds of concerns in the many low-budget indies I've acted in or worked on in other capacities. It's a great reminder for me of how important it will be in the short I plan to produce and direct next year. Thanks for bringing it so clearly to our attention, and describing some of your processes in detail. Great stuff...
 
ironpony said:
It's awkward cause only a second or two went by in between cuts, and he's all of a sudden in a different position. Doesn't look right, compared to better movies. But how do the real filmmakers avoid that.
Click to expand...

Going back to the original question, there are a couple of old Hollywood editing techniques that can help. One has already been mentioned: "cut to the dog." That's old editor-speak for cutting to some b-roll shot on the day, so you can bridge two takes together.

Another solution is to stay on the other actor longer. Newbie filmmakers often make the mistake of cutting to whomever is speaking. Some of the greatest moments of screen drama were created by holding on the actor listening and reacting to another character's speech.

One other idea: when looking for bridging material, look through your discarded takes, camera rehearsals, any footage you have of the same actors and set. You'd be amazed how many times a discarded trim turned into a vital part of the cut.

Sometimes, there's no saving it, and you have to choose the lesser evil. Is the cut worse, or the line?

HTH
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top