British Kinematography (1951)

January, 1951 HARRIS : PRE-PLANNING PRODUCTION 27 discussed with the Production Manager cf the film, who explained why the retakes had been necessary. In this way the letakes were split up according to their causes, as shown in Table IV. Most of the categories in this table are self-explanatory, except perhaps A and B. The distinction between A and B was preserved by thinking in terms of what new equipment would have avoided the retake. A is meant to include those cases where only greater ability or more experience on the part of the actor would have avoided shooting of a scene the actors had become exhausted by their repeated attempts to satisfy the director, and the director had, therefore, stopped shooting and ordered a take to be printed because though he was not fully satisfied with the performance achieved he knew he would get nothing better that day. When the scene was retaken the next day or even later, the director and actors approached it with fresh minds and new viewpoints based on the experience gained in their earlier attempts, and a much better take was shot. It is problematical in TABLE IV Analysis of Causes of Retakes Fi!m A Film B Film C Film D A. Actor performance deficient or action unsatisfactory ... B. Actor saw deficiency in his performance C. Director thought he could do better ... D. Technical effects or composition not what Director wanted (too much rain, inserts wrong size or speed, etc.) E. Lighting gave wrong mood F. Speech indistinct G. Continuity error, or fault in set discovered after first shooting of the scene H. Bad Back Projection Plate ... TOTAL 22 8 11 2 1 1 -30 16, f16 18 12 21 3 24 6'l r 5* 2 o 45 46 24 15 one of these was a double exposure trick shot. the retake. B contains those cases where the actor could appreciate at once on seeing the rushes in what way his performance failed to meet the director's demands, and if it had been possible to show the actor on the floor what his performance would look like on the screen he would have been able to achieve the desired performance at once and the retake would have been avoided. In practice the distinction between A and B was not as easy to preserve as this explanation might suggest. The view was expressed a number of times by production personnel that at the end of the first day's how many cases this final acceptable take had of its nature to be approached slowly with the benefit of a night's sleep on the way, and in how many cases an ""immediate rush device " would have permitted the successful take to be shot on the first day. Television Viewfinder and " Rapid Rush Machine" When this analysis was made the Operational Research team were trying to prepare a " technical balance sheet " for two new devices. The Television Aid was designed to give a television picture having in frame