Chatty Hollywood

In Hollywood, directors who can get the final editing rights are in the minority.

The larger the scale of film investment, the more obvious this situation is.

It is the producer who really holds the final editing rights.

This can be said to be the biggest manifestation of the Hollywood producer-centric system, but specifically, the reason is actually divided into two aspects-

On the one hand, it is too cruel to let the creator of the film to direct the editing.

Many directors treat their films just like their children, and they don't even deal with it.

Let them edit by themselves, and 80% of them will be reluctant to cut any shots, resulting in the final film being too long.

This obviously won't work.

Therefore, someone needs to edit on their behalf.

On the other hand, filmmakers who always pay attention to the market understand the tastes of current audiences better than directors who focus on filming.

Through the final editing, they can adjust the director's self-comparative work into a film that best suits the audience's preferences.

——Or commodity.

In this regard, because the information between the two parties is not equal, it is difficult for ordinary directors to confront those professional producers who study market data every day.

——At least before the movie was released, when the two sides talked about each other, it was often like this.

Of course, what I'm talking about here are those producers who have really studied enough market data and thoroughly mastered the laws of the market.

As for the number of such big producers, we can only say that the market is elusive...

In fact, who's opinion is more in line with the question of the market, many times everyone is actually talking on paper. In the end, it is not who is right or who is wrong, but who is more powerful.

The producer, who is the representative of the management, is certainly more powerful than the director, a senior worker.

then……

Counterexamples in this regard are not uncommon. For example, the famous "Kingdom of the Heavens" is a typical example of being cut and killed by the producer.

Even, because the producer will cheat from time to time, it also gave birth to a special movie version——

Director's cut version!

As the name suggests, this is a version edited completely in accordance with the director's will.

On the surface, this is a compensation for the director who does not have editing rights.

In fact, there is another factor in the production of the director’s cut version, which is to sell DVDs and video tapes.

For a film that has a successful box office, if a movie fan hears that there is a different director's cut version to watch, they are likely to pay one more time out of curiosity.

As for films that failed at the box office, the director's cut version, which is different from the premiere version, is a great tool for the film party to recover costs.

At this time, there will often be news that the producers disregard the director's opinion and cut it—although this is true in many cases—and then create a tragic color for the directors to waste their efforts.

Therefore, based on the psychology of sympathizing with the weak, and the curiosity of "Can it be worse than it is now?", the audience often spends money.

Then, the film side that was losing money may have recovered the cost without knowing it...

Therefore, in many cases, the producers and directors who compete for the dominance of the film are actually a pair of double insurance to ensure profit.

The producer guarantees that the director will not run wild, so that he can make a profitable film that meets the needs of the market.

Once the producer fails and the box office fails, the director can safely throw the pot over the former, and then pass a director's cut version to see if he can turn the tide and save the cost.

However, the latter trick is only used by some famous directors, such as Ridley Scott-at least "Kings of Heaven" did use this method to reduce a lot of losses.

Of course, despite the fact, the directors do not necessarily understand the ghost realm tricks of the management. They simply hope that the film will meet their expectations.

In fact, the director's cut version of most movies will be evaluated better than the release version led by the producer, but this does not change the ownership of the final editing rights in the slightest.

Because this kind of praise is tricky-

First of all, compared to the theater version, the director's cut version is generally released on DVD or video tape.

This version does not need to consider the grading problem, and can add some more impactful lenses;

In this version, there is no need to consider the length of time, so there is more time to tell the story clearly.

In addition, when fans watch videos and DVDs, they can skip, fast forward and pause, and take a break at any time, so their sensitivity to duration is much lower than in movie theaters.

——In a movie theater, the audience can only watch the movie in one go, and it is easy to get tired. Moreover, even if they are not physically fatigued, their bladder will remind them.

Secondly, fans who watch the director's cut version generally have a certain degree of favor with the movie they watch.

This is actually equivalent to screening the audience before watching the movie.

The loyalty of the selected audience is better, and the evaluation naturally gets better.

As for the last point, it can really be said to be cheating——

Think about when the director's cut version appeared!

Generally, the appearance of DVDs or video tapes will take one year after the film is released, and the shortest one will take three months. During this time, the director can sum up the lessons of the film and edit a new version.

Wouldn’t it be unreasonable if the edited version of this kind of standing on the shoulders of the predecessors could not be better evaluated?

Therefore, no matter how well the director's cut version is well received, the producer's control over the final editing rights cannot be shaken.

However, when it comes to Charlotte, things are different again—

Regardless of "Fatal Bend" or "Happy Death Day", the nominal final editing rights are not his, but the actual version is edited according to his will.

There are many reasons for this weird situation-

First of all, the producer Mr. Westwood is not very good at editing, so he is more decentralized.

In "Fatal Turn", in order to save costs in the early stage, the crew did not even use the editor.

In the later stage, Mr. Westwood was busy using the Vians Valley events for publicity. In order to hurry up, he had to open up the editing rights to Charlotte.

By the time of "Happy Death", Mr. Westwood already trusted Charlotte.

As for another second producer, Judy Foster, who can point fingers at editing~www.readwn.com~, but because of the Painted Skin incident, he had to follow his words...

The above situation led to Charlotte apparently not having the final editing rights in the two films, but actually controlled the editing.

However, this kind of good thing, in the time of "Drop Head", is likely to cease to exist.

Because based on Charlotte's memory of the original world, the production cost of this film is $65 million. This is not a super large production, but also a general large production.

With this level of investment, will investors trust Charlotte, a director who only made two films, to let him edit?

Even if he were to be a director, many investors might feel very uneasy.

This is more troublesome.

As a traverser, Charlotte asked herself, in terms of editing, he would actually be more sensible than the average director.

Especially, in the original world, he has seen the finished film of the movie, which allows him to stand on the shoulders of the "predecessors" when editing, just like those director's editing versions...

Therefore, he feels that he leads the editing and can get better results——

"After all, a director who doesn't want editing rights is definitely not a good director!"

Charlotte sighed helplessly.

He came to Judy Foster this time, in addition to discussing the film itself, but also to get the support of the queen queen on the issue of the final editing rights.

To this end, he also specially prepared a killer ——

"With this, it should be fine!"

Touching the human leather book in her handbag, Charlotte thought secretly.

PS1; "Director's Cut" is a feature film released in South Korea in 2014. PS2: I just wanted to briefly introduce the editing problem, but I didn't stop the car all at once. I'm sorry, I will give you a chapter of popular science.