Tim Amyx edits a movie for New Horizons pictures, January 1990. Showing how the Moviola works - talking to girlfriend in Mexico. Filmed by Julie Dole, assistant editor
Actually, they were edited in condemned 2-story buildings that were liable to fall down at any moment.😹 Sometimes, if Roger had friends in city gov't, only the 2nd story was condemned.😎
i'm fascinated by all this older technology folks had to use before avid came out. really makes me appreciate the amount of effort people put into films in the past
It truly was laborious, and slow - compared to that we all do now on the AVID or Premiere Pro. (not to mention, no use of transitions, multiple audio tracks, titles, and the ability to save previous cuts) Yet, since this was BEFORE the invent of Non linear editing, we just did it, and didn't think much about the slow process. In some ways, it was, "fun".
This was awesome. I'm reading Paul Hirsch's book. "Long Ago in a cutting room far far away" It's brilliant. He talks so much about the moive ola I had to look it up. This video put all the pieces together. Thank You.
This is great! I have made some 16mm films that I have cut on a Steenbeck (the most recent of which was in 2014), but I have never used a Moviola. It looks like fun.
Funny you should bring that up. I found this video looking for... "walter murch editing on a moviola." I well remember watching him edit at extreme high speed on a Moviola, and yes, I'm old, it was 40 years ago (1978). He would run it, X9 it with a grease pencil, pull out a big piece, measure it arms width apart, and CUT THE ORIGINAL, splice without taking it all out, run it back through, and the delicate edit was exactly where he wanted it. It was breathtaking, enough to make you weep. And I wasn't even an editor. But I understood I was watching something astonishing. An honor just to stand there.
@@writeride123 From your description, and what I know about Walter, if this was 1978, you "may" have been watching him edit on a KEM (or Steenbeck) Moviolas do not run super fast forward, and are much more cumbersome to stop and mark with a grease pencil. I'd love to see Walter confirm or deny this, but my suspicion you saw him editing not on a moviola, but a KEM or Steenbeck. (Note: If this was 1978, you probably saw him editing Apocalypse Now.)
Yes, thanks for that. I've edited on a flatbed Steenbeck before but have never seen a Moviola in action. Wow, must have taken forever to cut a picture together.
Nope. The thing about this method is you're forced to think - so you end up making better editing choices, faster. We also shot more efficiently since film was expensive, so we had fewer hours of footage to wade through, at most 10:1, at least at Corman's. I personally shot at 1.5:1 for my 1st feature.
George Lucas edited his first feature film for Warner Brothers, THX 1138 on a machine, a movieola, like the one in this video. Steven Spielberg's editor for JAWS, Verna Fields, edited the entire movie on a movieola and won an Oscar for her editing. Wow.
@@TimCalifornia that’s cool man just noticed u edited a movie I’ve seen lol slumber party massacre 3 was always interested in how movies were edited before Final Cut Pro
It's scary to see how tedious editing was before NLEs. I did it once-never again. Thank goodness for computers: they let you spend time on editing rather than overhead..
I believe it was easier for editors back then, because the concept of "we will correct this in post" was of way less proportions. An editors job back then was just to make a cut and a splice mostly but nowadays it is expected even of entry level editors to have a functional knowledge of visual effects, sound mastering and design. So even though the equipment used for editing has been reduced in size enough to be carried around in handbags and is able to manipulate video wholly by meager key strokes, the work ethic of movie making has shifted most of its burden away from the movie set and into the editing room.
Thats movie history right there. It's a lost art thanks to DNLE (AVID and such). I work in an office that has a Moviola and I think that machine is awesome. i would like to have one someday just to mess around and learn on.
So the developed film is actually cut and taped together? I kind of knew this, but to cut a film where you spent hundreds of millions of dollars to make? HAWKEYE
You spent hundreds of millions of dollars to film the movie, and look at the way the film is being handled during editing. So let's say you filmed a scene with two people talking on some big steps, then you go inside. But the inside is of a different building. Why did you do this ? let ME answer! The inside of the building has a beautiful interior ...like an old time court building, but the steps...well aren't that special. So the two people talk on the big steps, then go into the court building. The two seperit shots are spliced together. Am I correct? A movie was filmed in Baltimore (my home town) with Alan Alda (you know. Haewkeye from MASH) and they did that.
The original negative shot in the camera is not what is used during editing. The original negative is used to make a work print, and that is what’s used to edit the movie. After the edit is complete, the editor gives the edited work print to someone called a negative cutter who cuts and splices the original camera negative based on the edits in the work print. That negative is then used to make prints that are distributed to theaters. It doesn’t matter if the film the editor works with gets scratched up or dirty because it’s just used as a guide for cutting the original negative.
@@saiashwin26 I disagree I would say the tools are an art form in itself the especially skillful operation of such tools. And every tool adds to the final product creating something unique!
That was awesome. After watching this, I feel spoiled with digital editing.
Amen!
but digital has made dreams come to reality .
A tip: watch series on Kaldrostream. Me and my gf have been using it for watching all kinds of movies recently.
@Omari Mordechai Yup, I have been watching on KaldroStream for since december myself :)
This is incredible! Would be amazing to see more videos of you cutting on Moviolas. Always wanted to see this. Thanks for posting.
Thank you for posting this so I could show my kids how I spent about 15 years in the 70's - 80's. Brings back so many memories...
The days when B movies were edited in Venice beach garages, on 2nd hand equipment.
Actually, they were edited in condemned 2-story buildings that were liable to fall down at any moment.😹 Sometimes, if Roger had friends in city gov't, only the 2nd story was condemned.😎
Wow back in the day they had serious skill!
i'm fascinated by all this older technology folks had to use before avid came out. really makes me appreciate the amount of effort people put into films in the past
It truly was laborious, and slow - compared to that we all do now on the AVID or Premiere Pro. (not to mention, no use of transitions, multiple audio tracks, titles, and the ability to save previous cuts) Yet, since this was BEFORE the invent of Non linear editing, we just did it, and didn't think much about the slow process. In some ways, it was, "fun".
The way things are going in the software world I am starting to miss this style of editing.
You don't like having your work held hostage to force you to pay a ransom each month, forever?
so, this is how 35mm film audio is synchronized with the visual.
Oh my God! It always seemed to me that editing in editing programs is very difficult. Dear God bless computer technology!
Thank you for the video.
This was awesome. I'm reading Paul Hirsch's book. "Long Ago in a cutting room far far away" It's brilliant. He talks so much about the moive ola I had to look it up. This video put all the pieces together. Thank You.
I'll never whine again about minor missing functionalities missing on avid or adobe.
This is great! I have made some 16mm films that I have cut on a Steenbeck (the most recent of which was in 2014), but I have never used a Moviola. It looks like fun.
Moviolas were far more likely to eat the edit print. So we spent a fair amt of time repairing sprocket holes and whatnot.
I am reading In The Blink Of An Eye and it's crazy how fast things have changed
same!
Funny you should bring that up. I found this video looking for... "walter murch editing on a moviola." I well remember watching him edit at extreme high speed on a Moviola, and yes, I'm old, it was 40 years ago (1978). He would run it, X9 it with a grease pencil, pull out a big piece, measure it arms width apart, and CUT THE ORIGINAL, splice without taking it all out, run it back through, and the delicate edit was exactly where he wanted it. It was breathtaking, enough to make you weep. And I wasn't even an editor. But I understood I was watching something astonishing. An honor just to stand there.
@@writeride123 From your description, and what I know about Walter, if this was 1978, you "may" have been watching him edit on a KEM (or Steenbeck) Moviolas do not run super fast forward, and are much more cumbersome to stop and mark with a grease pencil. I'd love to see Walter confirm or deny this, but my suspicion you saw him editing not on a moviola, but a KEM or Steenbeck. (Note: If this was 1978, you probably saw him editing Apocalypse Now.)
Hey! Me Too! Just started reading that book.
Yes, thanks for that. I've edited on a flatbed Steenbeck before but have never seen a Moviola in action. Wow, must have taken forever to cut a picture together.
Nope. The thing about this method is you're forced to think - so you end up making better editing choices, faster. We also shot more efficiently since film was expensive, so we had fewer hours of footage to wade through, at most 10:1, at least at Corman's. I personally shot at 1.5:1 for my 1st feature.
@@LaJewel What was your job at Corman's? What movie did you work on?
As an 18 year old person, I wish I could edit on a moviola!
That was heavy physical work then
George Lucas edited his first feature film for Warner Brothers, THX 1138 on a machine, a movieola, like the one in this video. Steven Spielberg's editor for JAWS, Verna Fields, edited the entire movie on a movieola and won an Oscar for her editing. Wow.
Damn he basically did a UA-cam tutorial in 1990
So true..... I was actually making a "what I do" video, for my future wife, who was living in a different country.
@@TimCalifornia that’s cool man just noticed u edited a movie I’ve seen lol slumber party massacre 3 was always interested in how movies were edited before Final Cut Pro
It's scary to see how tedious editing was before NLEs. I did it once-never again. Thank goodness for computers: they let you spend time on editing rather than overhead..
I believe it was easier for editors back then, because the concept of "we will correct this in post" was of way less proportions. An editors job back then was just to make a cut and a splice mostly but nowadays it is expected even of entry level editors to have a functional knowledge of visual effects, sound mastering and design. So even though the equipment used for editing has been reduced in size enough to be carried around in handbags and is able to manipulate video wholly by meager key strokes, the work ethic of movie making has shifted most of its burden away from the movie set and into the editing room.
Love it
This was true hard, painstaking work. I cannot fathom why anyone would have wanted a job as an editor.
interesting you say that, because I happen to feel like today's editor will still want to be editors even back then out of passion for film
thinking about all breathtaking movies
We truly don't realize how good we have it these days...
The technology... Back in the day
I worked on the tail end of the film age… loved it
The editing part is extremely funny.. Holy crap
Muchas gracias.
Thats movie history right there. It's a lost art thanks to DNLE (AVID and such). I work in an office that has a Moviola and I think that machine is awesome. i would like to have one someday just to mess around and learn on.
When you really could feel the film growing up as you cut your way into it...
Thanks for posting this video.. :)
dang bro. Thank God for digital editing
Who is here after reading "in the blink of an eye" book
Me😎
Yep
Yup
I've read Walter's book, three times - AND had the opportunity to work as his assistant, two times. He's incredible in so many ways.
Me
Awesome
Wow.... Now that was something
Damn. Thank God for Avid & Fcpx.
Damn 😮
The workprint would get scratches during the process.
Yes - a LOT. As editors and filmmakers, we got used to it. It was expected.
THE MARINE LAYER!
Gosh, we are indeed spoiled by digital media...
I worked there 6 yrs later.
wow wow wow
The opera music in the background kinda ruined it, but it's pretty cool how video editing used to work.
Dang this guy was surrounded by young women
No wonder the film was covered in dust and hair back in the day
So the developed film is actually cut and taped together? I kind of knew this, but to cut a film where you spent hundreds of millions of dollars to make? HAWKEYE
You spent hundreds of millions of dollars to film the movie, and look at the way the film is being handled during editing. So let's say you filmed a scene with two people talking on some big steps, then you go inside. But the inside is of a different building. Why did you do this ? let ME answer! The inside of the building has a beautiful interior ...like an old time court building, but the steps...well aren't that special. So the two people talk on the big steps, then go into the court building. The two seperit shots are spliced together. Am I correct? A movie was filmed in Baltimore (my home town) with Alan Alda (you know. Haewkeye from MASH) and they did that.
The original negative shot in the camera is not what is used during editing. The original negative is used to make a work print, and that is what’s used to edit the movie. After the edit is complete, the editor gives the edited work print to someone called a negative cutter who cuts and splices the original camera negative based on the edits in the work print. That negative is then used to make prints that are distributed to theaters. It doesn’t matter if the film the editor works with gets scratched up or dirty because it’s just used as a guide for cutting the original negative.
Todays genration is lucky, we have everything right in front of us.
You are NOT lucky. You've missed an incredible experience.
@@mariongottmannross8916 Thats nostalgia, the world has moved on to better things. At the end, these are only tools that artists use to make art.
@@saiashwin26 I disagree I would say the tools are an art form in itself the especially skillful operation of such tools. And every tool adds to the final product creating something unique!
lol
Pfffff...thanx for NLEs...