 |
| Invader |
I've lost count of the number of filmmakers who have described editing as the best training ground for a director. The Chilean director Pablo Larraín has even said the film is found in the edit. The importance of the editor cannot be overstated, and behind writer and director Mickey Keating's ever-expanding filmography, has been a steadfast collaborator — Valerie Krulfeifer, his editor.
Keating's latest film, Invader, is a disquieting home invasion story that strips back its narrative to instead offer a vision of primal terror in the Chicago suburbs. Sitting with Keating and Krulfeifer, it's difficult to fathom that they could be the authors behind such an unrelentingly dark tale. And in a sunlit Leicester Square, I can't help but feel like the film belongs to a different time and place. Then, that's why we love cinema — it's like going down a rabbit hole, dragged out of our reality and sometimes into an experience that afterwards can have the vibe of a dream or a nightmare.
In conversation with Eye For Film, Krulfeifer and Keating discussed their shared influences and love of a bombastic style of editing. They also spoke about how Invader's roots can be found in a film they'd rather forget, and how Invader shares something in common with another of Keating's claustrophobic nightmares.
Paul Risker: To begin, what are your thoughts about the craft of editing and the role of the editor in filmmaking process?
Valerie Krulfeifer: It's funny. Other than the director, the editor of a film is the only other role, or head of their department that needs a deep understanding of every other department because you are embodying the writing, and you are essentially rewriting at that point. The film is written several times. There's the first draft, then there's the production and the actor's interpretation, and then the editors. The fourth could be when the composer gets their hands on it because it's another moment where a scene's intention and tone can change.
You have to be mindful of the effort everyone put into it, and there's definitely a hierarchy of needs when you're putting together a scene — some of it is very technical. Continuity is important but I wouldn't put that at the top of the hierarchy. Performance is of course very important, just as the choreography of the camera. You're taking into consideration the efforts of the whole crew. I always say that I'm an advocate for the audience first, the director's vision second, and then all the needs of the production.
Producers will of course always have very strong opinions, and some of them fancy themselves to be a creative producer. I think that's a self-grandiosing thought of themselves—that's a rant for another day.
The dynamic between Mickey and I is interesting because we're so close and I read his scripts first. I think he takes my opinion to heart, so I always feel very connected to the films. They are personal to him but also to me because I've been there from the jump. A lot of editors don't get that insight upfront.
I've been on set for some of his films. Psychopaths I was on set the entire time, just because of where we were in our lives. I was freelancing, so, I had lots of time, and I was very curious. We filmed it in Los Angeles, and I was able to be there and watch the whole production process. 99% of the time, I'm not on set and that's actually important for the editor because I'm just seeing what's inside the frame. I'm not thinking about how long it took to set up this one particular shot that is a gorgeous long take. I'm just looking at it to decide whether to throw it out or chop it up — I'm servicing the audience and then the film. And Mickey is great at accepting it if I tell him a moment is not working, and we need to throw it out. So, our dynamic is special because I get a peak behind the curtain more so than anyone else, and I'm trying to be as unbiased as possible to service the story.
PR: Are there any films or individual editors that from your point of view are seminal in developing the craft of editing?
VK: My editing goddess is Thelma Schoonmaker. We watch [Martin] Scorsese's filmography religiously, and when we're setting out to edit a new film, we will always put it on. Sometimes it will just be on in the background without the audio, like watching Killers Of The Flower Moon for the timing of the cuts.
Audio is so important to Schoonmaker and Scorsese; it almost trumps the actual visual cuts because there are so many continuity flaws if you're looking for them. Upon the first watch, the characters, the dialogue, the sound design, and the music are so immersive. Everything is flowing so wonderfully and there are so many little flourish edits. We always think about how that's a Thelma cut [laughs] when we have a little tiny moment that wasn't scripted and wasn't planned for — I call it "trawling for gold." I look at the heads and tails of takes, maybe the actors settling and reactions I'm always looking for to pull in. Maybe there's a little eye twitch moment that I just save and that's a school of thought that comes from Thelma, and what I've studied from her.
Sally Menke was a huge influence — the work that she did with Tarantino, was unbelievable. We watch his early films and just marvel. I'm trying to think of someone more recent — Amy Jump and Ben Wheatley's dynamic. Honestly, we worship at the altar. I guess they're the modern equivalent of our dynamic because I know she has a hand in writing and she edits their films as well, so I know they work closely together.
PR: I was rewatching some of Steven Soderbergh's films recently, including Ocean's Eleven (2001). I love the way he'll change the speed of the film rate and complement the disorientating effect with the edit and the consistent pace of the music. He's a director that reminds us of how pliable the form and its techniques are.
VK: It's very inspiring when the editing is at the forefront. There's a school of thought that good editing should be invisible — I reject this completely. Obviously, technique services the scene or the film itself. If you are trying to focus on character, dialogue, emotion, or tone, and it is supposed to be invisible, then that's one thing, but for us, bombastic editing has always been something that we've explored.
It's not always easy to find in the first pass — it's something we keep playing with. So, it's very inspiring to watch films where the editing is at the forefront like that, and you're right about if you use speed changes but your audio stays consistent. Anything that's disorientating for the audience and not unnatural to our reality is special, and that's something that only cinema can do. With a stage production you can't direct the audience's eye. You can try, but they're free to wander. In cinema, you have their full attention, so why not subvert their expectations within the edit.
PR: It's good to explore the limitations of the form, especially by subverting expectations. Is this approach shaped by feedback to the various cuts of the film?
VK: Our first cuts are pretty polished. When you're showing the movie to the people that paid for it, you like to leave them with as little guess work as possible about what it's going to be because that opens the door.
Mickey and I are perfectionists. As an editor, and in my day-to-day professional short form editing, as well as feature editing, I can watch a rough cut and understand the intention that another editor has. Maybe the full sound design isn't complete yet, and maybe it's not cut together yet, so, they'll just have a card saying a certain scene is going to go here. That's okay, but a lot of people that are collaborating will not be able to see that vision. Mickey and I always make sure that before we share something, the intention is very clear.
Mickey Keating: We had one movie where the producers said, "Well, you know, Val will string out a cut of just the scenes and the shots, and we'll watch it?" I said, "No, we're not doing that. Sorry." And we didn't and so they saw the movie when it was done.
VK : We don't drag our feet; it's just a matter of a couple of extra weeks of us sitting together and putting it together the way that we feel comfortable it's ready to share. It may not be perfect yet, but it's close.
PR: Can you see the story of Mickey's overall filmography through the experience of editing his films?
VK: It's funny, and I whisper in his ear, can I talk about Ultraviolence — our practicably unreleasable first feature. Invader's blueprint lives in Ultraviolence, which I star in. It was a film that we put together on the fly, discovering the plot and the scenes as we went along.
We were living in New York at the time, and every weekend we'd take the train to visit my parents in New Jersey. We discovered the empty train station as well as this character that is trying to get in touch with a family, and no one's picking up the phone. So, there's a lot of similarities, and that's why we didn't need a script for Invader because the bones were already there. And like in Invader, there is someone there at the house, where crazy things are happening. But no one will ever be able to see Ultraviolence.
MK: I don't know how to get it off IMDB. I have begged the people at IMDB to remove it.
VK: It was an experiment, and it's a story that has lived in our conscious for all of this time. As his filmography goes on, you're correct to say that we've been honing our craft. I've had my separate career of editing trailers and behind the scenes documentaries, and marketing. That short form has been essential in balancing my long form feature editing. They both inform each other because trailers are basically a summary of the story. So, I've become great at just boiling down essentials. Then, the snappy editing and sound design I've been honing in my day-to-day work I bring to the features, which have then allowed me to really breathe and slow down. My sense of pacing between them is so drastically different, and they do feed and complement each other.
I've edited every feature of Mickey's, and I think we had more creative differences early on. I always say in our relationship, our most heated arguments have always been about the art. It's funny because we've had some debates where I'm getting riled up, but we're arguing over our art which feels beautiful. So, I'm not actually angry, I'm just passionate.
Now, I know Mickey's sensibilities. I know what kind of music he likes; I know the types of moments from his characters and his actors that he's going to want to see onscreen. The first pass is always what he expects but then I will kick back, and I'll say let me try something else; let me try it my way, like a little bit of a wild card version of the scene. And at least 50% of the time, we go with that wild card. Sometimes he'll pull me back and say, "Let's go back to where we were at," but it's worth the effort of trying, especially with the technology we have now. We're not sitting with a Moviola, painstakingly cutting the film and digging through the bin looking for extra frames. We can sit there and duplicate our sequence in Premiere Pro.
MK: That's what's so great — it comes from a level of trust. If a producer came and said, "Let's just try this," I'd probably break something [laughs]. Film is all collaboration, and there's no one person that does it all. So you want to be inspired, and as co-authors, it's very inspiring seeing what Val does with what we shot.
PR: If you go back and look at films through the history of cinema, for example the montage and fight sequences in Rocky IV (1985), given the technology, the editing is impressive.
VK: Absolutely, and there's something so beautiful about those old films because we don't see flaws in the edits. A lot of times they made decisions, and they stuck with them. To literally go back into the bin and find your extra frames, you had to really want to put those back in. Now, with today's technology, you can sit there and noodle it for hours, days, weeks, and months.
I do have an appreciation when I think about some of my favourite older films, and knowing they made decisions in their head and committed to them. And it was more often than not the correct decision because those films are fantastic, and the story and the structure, the flow and the tone are perfect.
You can over-edit and over-iterate these days. Sometimes you'll put something together and it'll be your first pass, but you think it couldn't possibly be perfect. You need to try other takes but so many times you go back to that first cut because your original idea or your gut instinct was correct. Now that we have and can afford the luxury of iterating on a scene, you do sometimes need to see the wrong version to realise you should have stuck with your first instinct.
PR: Our conversation leads me to think that the story of the making of a film is one only a privileged few know about.
MK: From writing to shooting a movie, it becomes totally different, at least for me. My scripts, or in the case of Invader which embrace so much improvisation, always become different to the dream of what the film would be. What's so great about Val is she makes the dream come to life from what the shoot dictates. And it has always been like that — Darling (2015) was made in the edit. The shoot was a nightmare and so there were times when I thought "Oh my God, we're screwed."
Val made it what it was, and it was the same with Invader in a lot of ways, because the first cut of the movie was 90 minutes long. It was a lot of master shots of the main character walking around, and while I was shooting, I hoped it would work. But Val honed and reigned it in, and then it was about accepting that it needed to be 70 minutes long.
VK: A lot of editing is problem solving and I always equate it to putting together a puzzle — I love puzzles. I now have a confidence that I didn't necessarily have early on, and so, when Mickey says he's not sure how two scenes are going to cut together, I see that as a positive challenge. I used to freak out and stare at the screen praying an idea would come. Now, I have a bunch of tricks up my sleeve. I have the experience and the confidence to say "Let's come up with a few solutions and see what works best."
PR: You've used the word 'puzzle' to describe the editing process. It could also be described as a challenging and exhausting series of mental gymnastics.
VK: Definitely, and I suffer from migraines. Sometimes I have to step away from the screen because I've spent all day thinking too hard. But that's the joy that I get out of this career. I enjoy the process, and with more experience, it's very difficult to express the idea verbally that I have in my head without getting it onto the timeline and hitting play. Sometimes it doesn't work out exactly as I planned, and I have to throw that out and start fresh. And sometimes I'm working on one cut for an hour because I'm trying to find the right frame that's going to be the most aesthetically pleasing to cut on but also doesn't mess up the rhythm, while using the take that I want to use the most. There are times when a take that isn't perfect, but I'm determined to make it work, and so, I will sit there and give it time.
Giving editing time is key. I could throw something together and it could be watchable - the idea would be there - but would it be the best version? Absolutely not. In feature editing, which is a different beast, you are allotted more time. There are other mediums, especially the short form where they don't value that time in postproduction the way that they should. You're always begging for an extra day or an extra week if you're lucky, to refine something.
PR: It sounds like editing is creating order out of chaos.
VK: Absolutely! Invader was as chaotic as it ever got.
MK: Now, our new film is back to being so meticulously shot that we've actually put it together really fast.
VK; It's a combination of meticulousness but also Mickey and I just have a mind meld at this point. Going into the edit, I already know what Mickey will want to see. So, in terms of our version before sharing it with people for feedback that we trust, I think we get there so much faster than we ever have before.
Invader débuted in Alamo Drafthouse cinemas in March 2024 and held its international première at the 25th Anniversary Edition of FrightFest.
