Do I tend to overthink things in filmmaking?

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, but there are movies where lines of dialog are cut in post though, when you watch the deleted sections of scenes, so I thought it was standard practice to do this sometimes.

I could show the rising of the actor out of the chair but it's hard to do this if the actor already starts saying the line while starting to rise. Should I not have the actors speak while getting up to make those cuts easier in the future perhaps?

[Pete Cofrancesco]

Since we know it's possible edit lines out then it comes down to your lack of execution.

If you filmed him get up, walk to the window and then say his lines, you could have easily removed them.

You ignored bad dialog at the script and filming stage, and now are trying to fix it after the fact in the editing stage but didn't film the proper coverage...

[Paul R Johnson]

I do wish that you'd watch deleted scenes with interest, and not as if there was something wrong with them. Maybe the lines were removed because without them, the edit looked better, and losing the lines didn't mess the plot line, so it was a positive thing. The Dior just felt that it moved things on, and it was not a repair, which you of course assumed it was. Edit decisions are art, and frankly, I find this hard, so sometimes cutting things to make flow work better, or ease an awkward move are good things to try. If it means losing a few unimportant words so what? You often find deleted scenes that you know when you watch them, we're just pointless and waste time, or just add nothing. Not every edit technique is there for fixing mistakes.

[Brian Drysdale]

Having the coverage will allow you to remove unwanted dialogue, Scripts are commonly over length and the director may want the editor to tighten things up by cutting out lines that don't work. It's all part of editing, which is another rewrite of the story.

It's also the reason why producers want all those coverage shots,

[Ryan Elder]

Originally Posted by Pete Cofrancesco

Since we know it's possible edit lines out then it comes down to your lack of execution.

If you filmed him get up, walk to the window and then say his lines, you could have easily removed them.

You ignored bad dialog at the script and filming stage, and now are trying to fix it after the fact in the editing stage but didn't film the proper coverage...

Oh okay. But what shots would be the proper coverage then in this case for next time? I can't use a close-up because showing the actors eyes following the other after it gets up is not enough possibly. so what would the proper coverage be then?

[Brian Drysdale]

A two shot will do the job, this is basic stuff.

You can either have it favouring the other person, or the person standing up, the former having the advantage that you don't see the lips moving. Although, if using that, you'd probably need to shoot both in order to establish the window.

Depending on the content, a MCU or CU with the eye movement can be used. All you need is the person rising from the chair, cut to the close reaction shot and back to the wider shot the person now standing and then moving towards the window. Which way you shoot it depends on the power relationship os the two characters.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, by two shot do you mean OTS shot, or two people standing side by side in the shot?

[Brian Drysdale]

Two shot covers a wide range, which you use will depend on the dynamics of the scene. if they're facing each other, usually it's tending towards the OTS end of the spectrum, but being looser in that regard as the shot widens.

They can be filmed from the side, but it depends on the nature of the scene and perhaps this implies the characters being equals.

[Paul R Johnson]

In one question we're talking about the subtleties of cutting, and job role micromanagement, and then we're talking about film/TV school first week stuff about describing shots by industry standard phrases. If Ryan cannot understand the concept of a Two Shot, he's in deep trouble. Like talking about cardiac surgery without knowing where the heart is!

[Brian Drysdale]

I would suggest that he reads "Shot by Shot" written by Steven Katz, if he's already read it and still asking these basic questions, he's wanting to do the wrong job.

[Greg Smith]

"Two shot" means any shot with two (and only two) people in it. "Over the shoulder" is a special case of a two shot that focuses mainly on the face of one of the subjects, with the other seen mainly from behind (but closer to the camera).

Personally, I find the symmetrical two shot - two subjects equal in size on opposite sides of the frame, with the camera at 90° to the line between them - to be just about the most boring and awkward composition known to cinema, but if "boring and awkward" are the emotions you intend to evoke, then I suppose it has its uses!

[Brian Drysdale]

The side on 2 shot tends to be most effective in those diner scenes at a table where two characters are having an eyeball to eyeball face off or a closer in each others faces scene. It only works if it reveals the relationship.

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay, but if you have two characters looking at each other at a two shot, how does that help for coverage, since you can see one talking as he gets up, which you do not want to see, when trying to cut the line?

[Brian Drysdale]

The side shot two shot isn't there for "coverage" purposes, it's there because it reveals a relationship. There are often other two shots and singles which are used as part of the same sequence. If you've got singles. you've usually got shots that you can cut to if you wish to drop lines or change the timing.

Regarding the chair, if they're talking as they get up, show just enough to establish that they're getting up, If speaking, cut out the sound so that there's just some mouth movement as they rise, the audience is probably looking at their whole body moving than their mouth at this point. You don't need to show that they've got completely out of the chair, just that they're doing so, the other person's eye movement (plus sound effects - exhaling helps to explain the mouth) will assist in letting the audience know that they're rising. Then cut back when the unwanted line is finished. It's surprising what audiences won't see if you do it right, I once had a sound recordist in a quick shot of a crowd and no one noticed.

However, this won't cover an entire speech, only a line as they get out of the chair, Cut back as quickly as possible, so that they appear to be moving from the chair.

If, in the end, none of this works, you may have to live with the line and, in the future, only have dramatically important lines of dialogue when a character is getting out of a chair

[Ryan Elder]

Oh okay. Well for future situations like this, where I want to cut out a line, would OTS shots, instead of singles work, to cut around lines, or will the audience still see the person's mouth or cheeks moving in the OTS shot likely, if they will notice, compared to lookin at the other actor?