Views : 13,654
Genre: Film & Animation
Date of upload: Feb 25, 2023 ^^
Rating : 4.58 (64/545 LTDR)
RYD date created : 2024-04-23T18:25:45.487723Z
See in json
Top Comments of this video!! :3
I felt like her character is one that doesn't like to sit on thoughts. I feel like when confronted with reality she tries to dismiss or excuse it as soon as possible so she doesn't actually have to feel the pain of it. I think that's why she appears so shallow in the show. She doesn't like talking about politics or having deep conversations because she doesn't like to confront real issues. That's why I think the scene worked the way it was. It made sense to her deflective character that she would try to talk it away instead of thinking about the pain it would cause her.
9 |
Nice experiment! I like both. It interestingly put to light that you can change a character's persona through editing. If it was a standalone, I would prefer your cut, but considering the whole serie, I think the original is more in line with the character. Which is someone with a light hearted joyous carefree facade, that only lets her seriousness/sadness peak through by small bit, almost against her will.
With that in mind, the "over explaining", going from serious to making a joke of it to serious, is good!
18 |
Hi, I just happened to be very much moved by this scene when I saw it for the first time while watching the episode. And I loved the performance there and even thought about why she was speaking so much. I came to an understanding that maybe, she just wanted to let a lot of things out to someone who just understood her position in her marriage, and she just wanted to tell him that she wasn't okay with what was happening, but she's at a point where she doesn't care for it too much. Speaking of the re-edit, I just feel that her dialogues are too sudden now, lack a breather/spacing in between them for the audience to emote to each dialogue. Mostly because it wasn't done from the raw footage. But, the episode's original cut works better for me.
20 |
I think your edit emphasizes the performance better and the emotion imparted to the audience, yes. However, from a narrative it is jarring. I'm not convinced that Ethan would be convinced. In the full edit she carefully but gradually reassures him. He needs that to then be able to consider her advice and maybe even do something on the island with her (though we never really know).
In your edit it is too quick and it's less believable that the character would become comfortable with his reality with Daphne's limited words.
7 |
You gave me a valuable lesson on our podcast and I have taken that with me. The edit is a powerful tool. When I interview people there are many times where "what they say" is not exactly "what they mean" but with a little work it comes out perfect. Such a little known task with so much importance.
1 |
I LOVED the line “I don’t think you have anything to worry about”. However, it completely changes the tone of the scene, and that is what I expected. After that line the tone seemed all over the place, and I found that confusing. If that is supposed to be part of her character then it would fit and “we” would be used to it. Otherwise, it is just distracting, and I found it distracting.
In your version you enhanced the tone/emotion of I’m afraid my wife is having an affair. The ending of them walking off into the “sunset” seems to suggest that they may now have an affair of their own, which certainly continues to build tension.
So, yes, I like your version better. And I’m always looking for examples of changing the meaning of a scene to something else. And, just a side note, I’m always amazed what good actors can communicate with facial expressions. Sometimes, like in this, it is truly amazing.
4 |
I should have been a film editor. I find this utterly fascinating.
I loved the editing on White Lotus. I agreed with all of your edits, especially the last one. The only thing I’m queasy about is cutting all of her first little talk, because it felt painful to see her try to convince herself that her rationale is okay.
|
"It just weakens it for me" that's because you want her to act like a film edit, while the scene is shot so she acts like a real person. I find the latter better, less formulaic "this is how it should be done". People ramble. And then get it together. As she does in the original edit. Gives her time to breath. The new edit is more conventional
|
Nice experiment. I think you're right in that the dialogue could have been edited down a bit, but I'd still have started her line "You don't have to know everything..." on her. To see him instead somewhat diminishes the importance of her line. It's a big moment, and we should see her in that moment.
|
Yeah it absolutely plays better that way there’s still even one more piece I would’ve edited out and that’s that one where she just looks away and it’s just a shot on her kind of a medium shot and she just kind of looking off it’s not necessary it doesn’t really build and she’s got kind of a goofy sort of smile on her face almost but the edit that you did much much better
1 |
I think it could work if you had the footage. Right now, it feels cutty, and that distracts from the emotional flow of the scene. The reactions to him feel like it's used to cover the edit. The scene is obviously about her reaction to the news, so our instinct is to watch her. I do like the idea that less from her is more, but the edit isn't working due to the limitations of the footage. Good video tho! Really helps the viewer engage on what editing is!
2 |
the more i dive into filmmaking the more i realise that it could be better for the creatives to do as much as possible in terms of screenwriting, shooting, editing and so forth. its just natural that with all these people in line for the endproduct there will be unharmonics. i bet in the old days it wasnt like that but i could be wrong
|
@PhilEdwardsInc
1 year ago
the problem with your edit is that you're not deleting a real explanation - you're deleting her deflection, her excuse, for how she feels. if it were there for the "text" it should be deleted, but it's not- it's there for the subtext
46 |