How important is continuity to you?
- Thread starter D.Mur
- Start date
Mitch Gross
Veteran
Ever see the movie "Jagged Edge," a somewhat-forgettable courtroom drama? They obviously did a bit of mucking about in the edit, as there's one sequence where Glenn Close walks into a courtroom in one outfit, is seen inside the courtroom in different clothing and then exits in yet a third! No one ever notices unless I point it out.
How about "Reversal of Fortune"? There's a scene where Jeremy Irons is sitting at lunch meeting his lawyer Ron Silver for the first time. At an important moment the lawyer effectively insults him and the shot goes from a two-shot to a close-up of Irons. his character makes a dramatic pause at that moment in the eating of a shrimp, which magically switches hands fromte wide to the tight! It is a glaring continuity error and I'm sure the Script Supervisor was tearing her hair out when the movie screened, but they still got away with it. I recall the scene was even used as one of the clips for TV talk shows and movie review programs, so one could see it endlessly.
Continuity only matter for how much you can get away with screwing with it.
BTW, I've heard Script Monkey in the past, but far more often will hear Scripty. And it is definitely a job position far more dominated by women than men, mostly because it originated as a position that was an extension of the director's personal secretary. These days I believe it is actually one of the most powerful positions on set, as the Script Supervisor sits right by the director at the monitor and is one of the few people who has a real sense of the movie as a whole and how all the material might cut together. When I meet people interested in film but not particularly in the gear or technical side, I often point them toward the Script position, if they have the right midset for it. The only investment is a good binder and stationary supplies, perhaps one's own personal folding director's chair, and a keen attention to detail and spatial dynamics.
How about "Reversal of Fortune"? There's a scene where Jeremy Irons is sitting at lunch meeting his lawyer Ron Silver for the first time. At an important moment the lawyer effectively insults him and the shot goes from a two-shot to a close-up of Irons. his character makes a dramatic pause at that moment in the eating of a shrimp, which magically switches hands fromte wide to the tight! It is a glaring continuity error and I'm sure the Script Supervisor was tearing her hair out when the movie screened, but they still got away with it. I recall the scene was even used as one of the clips for TV talk shows and movie review programs, so one could see it endlessly.
Continuity only matter for how much you can get away with screwing with it.
BTW, I've heard Script Monkey in the past, but far more often will hear Scripty. And it is definitely a job position far more dominated by women than men, mostly because it originated as a position that was an extension of the director's personal secretary. These days I believe it is actually one of the most powerful positions on set, as the Script Supervisor sits right by the director at the monitor and is one of the few people who has a real sense of the movie as a whole and how all the material might cut together. When I meet people interested in film but not particularly in the gear or technical side, I often point them toward the Script position, if they have the right midset for it. The only investment is a good binder and stationary supplies, perhaps one's own personal folding director's chair, and a keen attention to detail and spatial dynamics.
Melvin Harris
Black Flag Member
It depends on the black guy you call a monkey, script or otherwise; Don't ever call me a monkey- I'm over 6' and 300lbs, I'd be more of a gorilla 
But seriously, we do have a problem with "monkey" sometimes, so check that stuff.
As for the question at hand-
I pay particular attention to performance continuity. I really am getting more and more stringent about finding actors that can repeat a performance once an emotional truth is found and build from there in order to help coverage. Now, I am not talking about repeating emotion, just physical and spatial performance so we can get into the moment and allow the performances to then dictate more coverage. If an actor can't get in the same space after the cut then that takes me out of the thing and we have to go to playback to get on track. However, whether or not the glass is in the same place... yeah, I pay attention to that, too.
But seriously, we do have a problem with "monkey" sometimes, so check that stuff.
As for the question at hand-
I pay particular attention to performance continuity. I really am getting more and more stringent about finding actors that can repeat a performance once an emotional truth is found and build from there in order to help coverage. Now, I am not talking about repeating emotion, just physical and spatial performance so we can get into the moment and allow the performances to then dictate more coverage. If an actor can't get in the same space after the cut then that takes me out of the thing and we have to go to playback to get on track. However, whether or not the glass is in the same place... yeah, I pay attention to that, too.
Cracker Funk
Member
I'll be honest -- I kind of think this conversation is a little bit silly, only because there's no way for us to know what level of continuity any of us are talking about. Continuity isn't something that is either on or off, there are shades of grey.
Continuity matters. A lot. Glaring problems in continuity will take your audience out of the scene (and, you make your editor's job exceedingly difficult). But what exactly makes a problem in continuity "glaring"? How bad does it have to be for the audience to notice?
There's no way to answer that question with discussion. You kinda just have to see examples that slip by you, vs. those that are totally noticeable. I don't remember anyone complaining when Neo's hands kept changing positions, in The Matrix. But that doesn't mean continuity doesn't matter.
I say shoot for continuity, but don't be a Nazi about it. That's incredibly vague for me to say, as this is an incredibly vague conversation. Do what works for you. Only experience will teach you just what that is.
Almost forgot -- swopiv, this is the original video you referenced:
Continuity matters. A lot. Glaring problems in continuity will take your audience out of the scene (and, you make your editor's job exceedingly difficult). But what exactly makes a problem in continuity "glaring"? How bad does it have to be for the audience to notice?
There's no way to answer that question with discussion. You kinda just have to see examples that slip by you, vs. those that are totally noticeable. I don't remember anyone complaining when Neo's hands kept changing positions, in The Matrix. But that doesn't mean continuity doesn't matter.
I say shoot for continuity, but don't be a Nazi about it. That's incredibly vague for me to say, as this is an incredibly vague conversation. Do what works for you. Only experience will teach you just what that is.
Almost forgot -- swopiv, this is the original video you referenced:
Last edited:
I respect your opinion, but subjectivity is a cornerstone of directing discussion because directing is inherently subjective. We all probably have different ideas of what a "good performance" is. But, that shouldn't preclude us from discussing how we can get a good performance from an actor. I think the same could be said here. There are other forums within this site that deal with more black and white technical issues, but discussions on directing should be as open to areas of grey as the art directing is itself.
As it relates to the specific question I posed, I was merely interested in how continuity impacts the decisions those on this forum make as filmmakers. The levels of continuity you speak of weren't as important to me as how the idea of maintaining continuity impacts the filmmaker. Also I'd disagree with the idea "there is no way" to answer this question. Again, I'd point out the question is subjective, in which case there is no wrong way to answer the question.
Melvin Harris
Black Flag Member
+1
I think if you're on set purposely choosing not to worry about continuity, then the end result isn't going to be so good in most cases.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
A cursory review of the films of Ed Wood, suggests this to be true... But I do think that the bad acting, poor blocking, scripts with more plot holes than Blackburn in Lancashire, crummy lighting, and almost anything else 'covers' the continuity errors for the most part...
Cracker Funk
Member
I don't think we're communicating on the same page. Think of how spicy food can be. When you say a food is hot, that has absolutely no bearing on how other people may describe it. I know plenty of people who treat Tabasco, Frank's Hot Sauce, and Sriracha like they're mild, and drown all of their food in them. Then, there are those people whose mouths burn up with even a drop of hot-sauce. How much does spiciness influence your food-eating decisions? Depends on what you mean by "spicy".
That's what I'm trying to communicate to you. When we talk about continuity, how do we know that the level of continuity you are talking about is the same level of continuity that I'm talking about? We don't know each other's levels of continuity-spiciness. Because this is not something that is either off or on. It's not like an edited video is either perfect in continuity or the worst thing ever -- there are shades of grey. And over the internet, how in the world do you or I know what each other's shades of grey mean, when we talk about this?
How does maintaining continuity impact the filmmaker? Well, if an incontinuity is glaring and obvious, you'd better re-shoot it! But how glaring and obvious does it need to be in order for you to deem it glaring and obvious? Do you see how the shades of grey actually are relevant to this conversation? If any of us see something that is terribly out of place or just kills continuity, we won't allow it. But what you or I see (during production) as terribly out of place could be completely different things.
There are plenty of very valuable lessons in filmmaking that can be learned academically, perhaps in a forum like this one. But there are TONS of lessons in filmmaking that just have to be experienced. Continuity matters to all of us. You can't ignore it. How much, and in what ways, does it influence your decisions on the set? Only experience will answer that question.
I could go on a pretty long tangent responding to this. But I would just repeat what I already said about directing being inherently subjective, and that subjectivity shouldn't preclude us from discussion. I would probably go on to re-state that if anything subjectivity OPENS the doors of discussion rather then closing them. I guess we'll just agree to disagree bud.
I do have a question for you though...
Other then the very technical aspects of visual storytelling, what areas of directing don't include "shades of grey"?
Cracker Funk
Member
When in Rome.
And by adding that point, you're actually un-doing the agreement to disagree.
Yes, yes, I see your point. Everything is subjective, and there are always shades of grey. Fair enough. All I'm saying, on this particular subject, is that it's difficult to discuss it because we don't have a working definition. There's no way to know that you and I are thinking of the same level of continuity when we say that it is important or not important. It's important to all of us. I don't believe there is a director, anywhere on Earth, who would shoot one take with an actor wearing a baseball cap, then in the next take (same shot), move him to the opposite side of the room, put him in a dress and big church hat, and paint his face purple. Obviously, that would be a little too much discontinuity. But in the real world, we don't usually deal with extreme examples like that. In the real-world, I think it's fair to say that absolute perfect continuity is quite literally an impossibility.
So, when we ask the question, "How important is continuity to you?", well -- what level of continuity are we talking about? Minor problems in continuity don't really matter. Major problems in continuity are unacceptable. But what do you mean by "minor" and "major"? You see what I'm saying? The discussion is difficult to have if we don't know that our language is being used in the same way. That's why I say that this is a question that is better left answered by experience. And now, we can agree to disagree. Cheers.
