The Forgotten Profession; Uncredited Film Editors and Animators in Hollywood
With every award-winning motion picture, there are at least a thousand people who feel responsible. Every movie can be broken down to its individual parts, for which someone has taken claim. Unfortunately, movies are not always credited based on merit, but by prestige. Instead of recognizing individuals according to the impact they had on the project, society credits the most recognizable roles. By habitually praising certain roles in Hollywood, film editors are negatively impacted. The title 'film editor' holds little weight despite the editor's highly influential and indispensable role on the project. Wayne Baker and Robert Faulkner of the American Journal of Sociology published a written work titled “Role as a Resource in the Hollywood Film Industry” which frames the importance of one’s title in this collaborative industry.
“Like all culture productions, film projects are arenas in which people with various business and artistic interests compete and negotiate to shape the decisions and premises upon which culture production is collectively organized. Roles provide the institutional and cultural means to compete and negotiate. Roles are a resource because they grant legitimacy, stake claims on various resources, and delimit jurisdictions” (Baker & Faulkner 1991).
To water down one’s title strips them of their ability to “stake a claim” and potentially further their career through notoriety. Film editors are methodically being dismissed throughout the industry, regardless of their influence on the product. Even as film animation, editing, and graphics have become more sophisticated, film editors are still not provided the necessary credit for their role.
I challenge you to think of your favorite action film and consider what makes it so intriguing to you. The great elements are probably not the underlying romantic subplot or the inspiring personal transformation of the main character. What makes action films so great are the explosions, the car chases, the unbelievable stunts, and the mystifying worlds within them. These components are created skilled professionals that spent months, if not years, perfecting the realities we become so obsessed with. Unfortunately, these professionals are not recognized in the film industry and key contributors to the process. Professional film editors are significantly undermined in the film industry, despite their enormous presence and undeniable necessity in the creation of any film. Since there are six major motion picture studios, all film editors are seeking work from these main production companies. This narrow field instills the fear of being blacklisted, or written off, by the major studios. This is also, undoubtedly, the reason studios can get away with the mistreatment of their post-production team.
The editing professional is considerably misunderstood, as many people are unaware of the kind of expertise editors hold, such as how visual effects are indeed manufactured by editors. These professionals receive little to no formal recognition at film awards such as The Academy Awards. Wildly popular films such as “The Chronicles of Narnia”, “Transformers”, and “Pirates of the Caribbean” are identified and praised by their leading actors, and not the professionals that created those worlds. Changes need to be made within the industry, as well as academic institutions, in order to sufficiently support, educate, advocate, and encourage the practice of editing.
In the summer of 2016 a highly publicized and profitable comedy film “Sausage Party” was distributed by Sony Pictures. The animated film was constructed entirely through visual effects, at a company called Nitrogen Studios. Since the release of the film, editors of the flick have come forward to admit that they were not fully paid, or properly credited for their work.
As outlined in a Variety article by James Rainey and Ben Lang, the industry has been constructed in a manner that allows for the abuse of power positions.
“They said they felt intimidated into remaining on the job, without complaint, for fear they would not be hired for future projects at Nitrogen and potentially elsewhere in the close-knit animation industry.” (Rainey and Lang).
The industry leaves no room for protest or speaking out on the unjust happenings within certain companies. The “close-knit” state of the industry allows for an abuse of power from film executives. According to the animation professionals, they have still not been compensated for overtime put into the production of the film, of which there is a substantial amount. Also, only half of the animators were credited for their work on the film. This discourtesy and lack of professional respect are unfortunately not uncommon, as similar complaints have been made in the past. Even in films such as “Sausage Party” where the contribution of visual effects artists is so obvious and undeniable, there is still insufficient acknowledgment and appreciation for editors. If this kind of disregard continues then we will undoubtedly see a decline in aspiring editors, as there is no support or motivation to succeed in the industry. Unfortunately, a certain level of confounding support already exists at the academic level as well, as evident in the country’s top film schools.
Support for the practice of editing needs to begin with education, but there is a substantial lack of editing courses at Universities all across the country. For a Bachelors of Arts degree in Post Production at Emerson College, one of the top ten film schools in the US, students are still only offered two traditional editing classes, both of which focus entirely in Avid. The only linear editing software that is formally taught at Emerson is Avid, even though the industry standard also includes Premiere software. It is not just Emerson College though, this method of ignoring foundational editing skills is widespread. In 2006, University of California, Los Angeles advertised an editing intensive course taught by specialists Mark Sawicki and Glenn Campbell, titled “Special Visual Effects Cinematography.” The school distributed an informational text (Wolff, Ellen. 2006) which boasted that students will be given the tools they need to create their own animated movies, and effectively utilize the necessary software. In theory, this class sounds like a step in the right direction, since Visual Effects classes are essentially non-existent at traditional film schools, but it is not as progressive as it sounds. The class was only offered for one semester at UCLA, proving that the skillset is viewed as nonessential. The sheer fact that the class was marketed in a way to show off innovative, “new,” and forward-thinking visual effects artistry just showcases the insufficient level of support.
By not offering enough educational opportunities for editors, it forces aspiring creators to self-teach. This is not the ideal way, as there are many formal techniques involved in all areas of editing. Beyond mastering the complexity of software involved, there is a specific intuition that needs to be molded in a collaborative environment. As noted by Karen Pearlman in Cutting Rhythms: Shaping the film edit (2009), there is a rhythm to making cuts, “something developed from mindful awareness of the rhythms of the world and the rhythms of one’s own body.” This kind of skill is not something that can be taught over the internet, as Pearlman describes it as a connection to the world around you. There is a necessity to master the craft in a collaborative setting, as the profession itself requires a large amount of collaboration with different directors as well as other editors.
“The editor is a material, physical, rhythmical entity that accrues rhythmic knowledge of the world. However, her body has another function in the creation of rhythm. It doesn’t just recognize and store information about rhythm, it also provides rhythms. The editor’s living, breathing body is the other source of rhythm available in the edit suite. Rhythm is in her own physical presence” (Pearlman).
The presence of the editor is very tangible, as noted by Pearlman. There is artistic flow in the editor’s cuts, which often times sets the mood for the entire story. The intricacy of this specialty should not be undermined through unpaid wages and insufficient credit because editors hold the most power over the final product. The editor sifts through hours upon hours and hours of footage and hand selects the actor’s performance, giving them a hand in the success of every Oscar-winning actor. Had the editor chosen another cut, another rendition of the same emotional monologue, the actor’s acclaimed performance may have never been recognized. There is credit due when an actor’s mistakes are permanently erased and lost to the cutting room floor, while the winning performance was so meticulously selected and modified. There are stylistic choices made by every editor that are too often written off as the director’s vision.
(Figure 1) Source: Fresnobee
On February 22nd, 2017 a short film was released, Hollywood’s Greatest Trick, documenting the mistreatment of VFX artists in Hollywood. The documentary film acknowledges,
“In practically every modern blockbuster, the visual effects department is the largest group of workers.” (refer to Figure 1).
It is evident that the work of these artist is very much relevant and necessary yet it is still a claim that “credits often fail to list up to one-third of those who actually worked on the film.” The film exposes that recognition is not the only issue plaguing editors in the industry. Too many industry professionals are misinformed about the amount of work that goes into creating these visual effects, so the expected turnover rate is unrealistic. Editors are assigned intricate animation projects and then given a due date that does not reflect the workload or respects the time of the editor.
“Older workers say they feel pressured to match the output of younger people, who routinely put in 80 hours a week, or fear being fired” (Longstreth, Patrick TruTV)
In 2014 the world was given insight into this perplexing power struggle going on in Hollywood through a documentary by Scott Leberecht called Life After Pi. The film exposed the disheartening truth behind the creation of the critically acclaimed film Life of Pi, and their visual effects contributors Rhythm & Hues Studios. The documentary explains,
“In 2013 Rhythm & Hues Studios won the Academy Award for visual effects for Life of Pi, 11 days after declaring bankruptcy”
-( Life After Pi).
How can a visual effects company like Rhythm & Hues Studios, who have clearly exhibited their talent and level of excellence, not remain financially stable? The answer goes back to insufficiency. The documentary notes that the funding provided from the production company did not properly cover the cost of their labor. The visual effects could not be created within the work hours funded by the production company, yet the visual effects artists still have a significant amount of work that needed to be done. Rhythm & Hues Studios paid the artists “out of pocket” which eventually led to financial instability. As noted on the official press website of the Life After Pi documentary,
“The old model of the movie business is passing away, yet modern-day Hollywood grips it ever more tightly. VFX companies and artists are treated as mere cogs in the machine, with little regard to creating a sustainable, collaborative working relationship. This will lead not only to the demise of more VFX companies, but to increasing instability industry wide”
-( Life After Pi).
The mistreatment of these artists sets us up for a very unsustainable future with visual effects. Editors are viewed as expendable, so instead of seeking compromise employers will simply replace the editor that complains about the work conditions. These positions then become a revolving door, as editors are receiving unrealistic task expectations, and then being fired when they can’t meet the deadline, or fail to keep quiet about the insufficient recognition. In turn, these jobs are then eventually getting filled by less qualified, or inexperienced editors and the quality of the content suffers in the end. This is an issue that affects the film and television industry as a whole, as the system in place will soon have very obvious repercussions.
Change needs to start from the base level. Post production education needs to be more widely accessible, and these academic institutions needs to provide ample opportunity for editing students to explore their field. Academic institutions are responsible for educating the next generation of editing professionals, and that responsibility should be given due diligence. Beyond graduation, the film industry needs to provide ample support for these professionals through fair wages and credit. There is an untapped excellence that exists within the full collaboration between film professionals. If editors were properly compensated for their time, then perhaps they would be more willing to expand upon projects. If a professional is not getting paid enough to cover the minimum amount of work required, then it is unlikely they will go the extra mile and expand upon the limits of the production. If editors were encouraged through the proper professional respect, then the film industry as a whole would significantly benefit as well. I am not asking anyone to worship film editors, or put them on the movie posters that plaster our walls. I am simply asking that the film industry to acknowledge the individuals making their cuts.
Work Cited:
Al-Jamea, Sohail “Hollywood’s Greatest Trick.” Fresnobee. Published Feb 22, 2017. Film.
Baker, Wayne E., and Robert R. Faulkner. "Role as a Resource in the Hollywood film industry." American Journal of Sociology 97.2 (1991): 279-309.
Emerson College."Post-Production (BA, BFA)." Web.
Girgensohn, Andreas, et al. "A semi-automatic approach to home video editing." Proceedings of the 13th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. ACM, 2000
Hadley, Greg. “Hollywood's Greatest Trick.” Fresnobee. Published Feb. 22, 2017. Article
Lang, Brent and Rainey, James "‘Sausage Party’ Animators Allege Studio Used Unpaid Overtime." Variety. N.p., 16 Aug. 2016. Web.
Leberecht, Scott. Life After Pi. Hollywood Ending., Feb. 2014. Film
Pearlman, Karen. Cutting rhythms: shaping the film edit. Amsterdam: Focal Press/Elsevier, 2009. Print.
Wolff, Ellen. "Visual Effects At UCLA." Animation 20.1 (2006): 54. Film & Television Literature Index with Full Text. Web. 30 Jan. 2017.
