Friday, July 24, 2015

A Lesson In Eyeline


One of the most obvious yet, diabolically challenging but deceptively simple sequence to shoot are conversations in daylight while maintain orientation. Even big movies suffer this issue. The best way to describe it is to make sure people are facing each other when they are talking. People not looking at each other while talking is off-putting and weird. Done for effect (such as when Kubrick intentionally does it) it is cool. Mistakenly doing it, is bush league. I kick myself for being this far ahead of making movies and still stumbling on this.
The wrong effect is a guy faces on direction to speak to someone, then cuts away, then it cuts back to the guy…there’s a shift. You may not see it, but you feel it. It’s a crushing thing in editing when things are inverted with performances from one take, that don’t work with another. Frustrating to say the least. On thing you can do, is to flop the frame. Basically flip it to match the direction to which the actor is speaking towards. Unfortunately, I had him stand ¾ sideways wrong direction, and also, the sun would then also be on his wrong side. This IS something people will see.
Sometimes you can get away with it. For instance, Michael Bay has his actors constantly backlit. If you edit back and forth, it doesn’t appear too odd, but if you stop to think about it, that would mean there are two suns in that world. Movie magic for the sake of vanity is fine. Everyone can get aboard when actors look good.
Typically, productions tend to do one master wide shot to include to two people just to free you up to orientation. I hate using this crutch, because it always looks weird. A two shot is the dullest thing in the world. Unless you have great dialogue, it’s usually a boring frame. It also flattens out the cinema screen. We fake three dimensions. Two shots are reserved mostly for stage.
Anyway, I’m having issues now with matching looks. Unfortunately, I didn’t cover the entire scene with full takes. The beats are long, and I didn’t know how much more film we were going to burn through. Having a script supervisor may’ve been nice on this day. However, even on the feature I was shooting, my mind was so melted from the hours, I doubt her suggestions would’ve sound anything less than Charlie Brown’s teacher.
I’ve heard crazier stories about visual effects fixes that have NOTHING to do with the movie itself. On one movie, there were blemishes being removed, close up of actor’s crow’s feet removed (which, by the way, isn’t even someone you would consider vain). If I’d flip the actresses side of the screen and have her face the opposite direction, I’d also have to erase her shirt (as it has words on it). Crazy world, huh?
Anyway, it bothers me a little, but not enough to go nuts. The performances worked, so I’m good with that. I do lament about more technical stuff. Like had I had permits, and a bigger crew, I’d take the harsh sun off the actors and bring in a reflector. I regret more about not bringing in something to pop out and make it look better. I regret not having the lens filtration to knock down the grittiness of being two stops overexposed. Also, that I didn’t get a tighter close up so I could save the scenes. I frequently live a world of two movies. Happy with a lot of it, just gutted when it goes a little off.
But looking through this cut again, I am so very happy about the fact that there are workable moments. And now to fine tune, and give it to people to decide if these mistakes bother them. I think it’s the bigger picture that ultimately counts.

No comments:

Post a Comment