This article originally ran onDen of Geek UK.
Photo courtesy of Robbie Carman/Amigo Media LLC
The editing window has long been a savior for movie directors.
Ad content continues below
Marshall is not alone.
Studio interference aside, thats the way many famous directors approached their way.
Take the most recent James Bond adventure,Spectre.
That it was the longest James Bond film not by choice, but ultimately by circumstance.
Neither of these films had anything close to complex effects work.
The post-production time was, at heart, for a director to sit down and work their film out.
Its bloated feel was, arguably, a forerunner of the era that would follow.
Its a common complaint that the running time of blockbuster movies has been rising, for little narrative benefit.
Principal photography on theAvengerssequel finished in August 2014.
The film was in cinemas in May of 2015.
Lets pick another example.
The film was released six months later, again with hugely complex technical post-production work needing completion.
To make the subtle changes, or the larger cuts, it surely could have benefited from.
Im not deliberately picking on those that Ive chosen.
Clint Eastwoods approach is one such remedy to this.
The article covered the intense preparation for the one scene even before Eastwood arrived.
That, appreciating time in post-production is dwindling, to get more locked down beforehand.
Occasionally, a major director has the clout to try something different.
Yet Miller had time, and no shortage of it.
Miller finished principal photography on the movie in December 2012.
Not to edit it: to simply watch it.
It also meant it was safely in Warner Bros hands long before the May 2015 release date.
Mad Max, in many senses, was one exception though.
Perhaps this is why we hear the phrase fix it in post a little less than we used to.
Theres not the time to fundamentally alter a film thats testing badly.
