Screenwriter serves as an opponent of directors working on the script and on the literary basis. Cameraman is an opponent on the image. And the editing director is called to be the opponent of the director when creating a film editing solution. The editing director participates in the work on the film already during the preparatory period.
Film editing is the addition of a film, how the frames are linked together and how they affect on the viewer. Dramaturgy in the film is realized through editing. All stages from writing the script to the filming process are preparatory, auxiliary to the editing, they only provide the material with which the installation is dealing. But in addition, the installation organizes the material collected at the previous stages, it organizes the processes themselves, which this material is collected, since everything that is done to create the film is done in order to be mounted. All processes are designed to be carried out in such a way as to strengthen theediting. If there are any elements (shots and episodes) that can’t be mounted in the final film, so the process is organized inefficiently.
And not vice versa, as if the person involved in editing, owns the profession at an insufficiently high level. So, there were some mistakes in the editing solution of the film at the preliminary stage. Editing doesn’t deal with history or the material world with a recorded camera, but with the film itself, directly with how the film will impact the viewer. Because the conversation about the editing, as a choice of specific moves in specific situations to perform specific tasks doesn’t have much meaning. This is only the lowest mechanical aspect of editing. Installation includes a story, intonation, impact and tempo-rhythm. In the film, all these aspects do not exist separately, but together. All this is the editing, and not only the order of shots, the distribution of sizes
and accents. The way out to utilitarianism, into the field of the developed methods leads to a lack of understanding of the very first choice: why these techniques and to what effect they lead.
At one time I had to answer the question, what is intraframe editing. I didn’t find another answer, except that «everything in the frame is the result of intraframe editing». Film editing deals with combinations. In this case, the combination of shots doesn’t differ much from the combination of the character and the background or the combination of the beginning and the end of the panorama. We think in combinations. Even if we imagine that there is no combination in the shot, this is already a choice made on the territory of intraframe editing, this is a combination of the absent with the present, this can be a pointer to the fact that there is no something in the shot, or that it is present outside frame.
Take for example a chair. It is determined by its function. They sit on it, and it seems that it should be comfortable and durable. Here you can master the manufacture of comfortable, sturdy chairs and some secrets of such skill. For example, some transverse crossbar and ways of its attachment to the legs of the chair. The function of the film as a work of art is arcane. From the way we treat the film, it will depend on what kind of film it will be and what the role of editing in this film will be. There are film-chairs, helicopter films, impression films, poetry films, memories and all of them have their own secrets, but the main secret is the type of film itself, because exactly it is this attitude of the author to the media itself that collects the film is put together.
In general the most common belief is that everything is going around intentions. The author has something to say and the means are in the works. This is certainly so, but then it turns out that the film is absolutely unimportant. More precisely, it's important only as a carrier, or a performer of the author's desires. It could be a book or something else. Such an approach has an impact on a result. And each of us has repeatedly witnessed the use of the film as an aid to utterance.
Don't look for easy ways to create a movie. From how deep or primitive you perceive the film, the result will directly depend. Professionalism in the field of editing isn't so much a set of techniques or skills that are undoubtedly necessary, but rather it's an understanding of the nature of the film, its boundaries and possibilities.
In fact, the theories of film editing, that is, ideological systems that describe the approach itself to editing, not so much. Until now, the study of editing in most film schools in the world is beginning from studying the legacy of the Soviet school of editing, the great four: Eisenstein, Pudovkin, Kuleshov, Vertov. They laid the theoretical basis for understanding cinema as a complex polyphonic system. Each of them interpreted the film in his own way. One of the points of divergence and active research was the interaction of neighboring shots. Eisenstein called this connection a «junction» and was a supporter of a conflict. Vertov proceeded from musical understanding and determined the interaction of shots through the «interval».
This isn't the place for a more extensive analysis of these theories, but it is important for us to understand that such categorical discrepancies arose not from scratch, but were related to the search for the author's method, with the desire to see the film as a work of art, and not an odd thing, which at that time wasn't so obvious. The situation today hasn't changed so much. Very rarely the film claims the title of a work of contemporary art. What film will be? This choice is yours.