Archive notice: This article was originally published on November 25, 2013. Links and embedded videos are preserved as part of the historical record.
This interview originally appeared in Digital Production 02 : 2013.
Tim Squyres has made eleven films with Ang Lee to date – before “Life of Pi”, including “Hulk”, “The Ice Storm”, “Sense and Sensibility”, “Eat Drink Man Woman” and of course “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”, for which he received one of the coveted Oscars for Best Editing. He has also directed theatre plays and award-winning documentaries.
DP: How did you get involved with “Life of Pi”?
Tim Squyres: I had worked with Ang Lee (the director) many times before. When he was approached by Fox, he picked up the book and sent me a copy – we both read it carefully long before there was even a script.
DP: What was different compared to your previous films? For example, “Tiger and Dragon” or “Syriana”?
Tim Squyres: The main difference, of course, is that we have a huge amount of VFX – including the second most important character! Normally I only have what I get from the set for editing – but with “Pi” the tiger was adapted right up to the end in post-production and I was still able to make specifications for the scenes. What’s more, “Life of Pi” has a voiceover in many scenes that can be modified afterwards without breaking the budget. We also made ample use of the opportunity to adapt the voiceover and editing to each other. Another important point was that it was a stereo 3D film. Finding the right “rhythm” of a film and implementing it in the cut is one of the main tasks of an editor – and “Pi” had a completely different rhythm than I had ever edited before.
DP: “Life of Pi” has several visually distinct chapters. The narrator level, the youth and the phase on the lifeboat. How did the rhythm change in each case?
Tim Squyres: We cut the first part of the film, in which the adult Pi talks about his youth in India, quickly and “lightly” – almost like a comedy. This approach builds up the contrast to the scenes at sea. We may have exaggerated the separations a little in favour of the contrast – but I think this particular story needs that. In the last act, when the adult picks up the narrative again and tells the second story, I cut it almost like an interview. That means very close to the dialogue to underline the documentary-like seriousness.
DP: You opted for Avid’s Media Composer for the editing – what was your experience with the new version?
Tim Squyres: The work started in January 2011, a few months before Media Composer 6 was released. So we were editing in MC 5.5. Although both my assistant and I were beta testers of version 6, it wasn’t quite ready for a big feature film – it was a beta version. We wanted to use it because version 6 has a huge advantage over version 5 due to the stereoscopic features. Working with version 5 was a lot more time-consuming. That’s why we reshot in 2012 and I was on set with a mobile workstation and MC 6 – via the network on the Video Assist Drive, which recorded with ProRes. The import went very quickly and I was able to start the rough cut almost immediately. This was very useful, as we reshot individual scenes in places and I was able to throw them straight into the existing edit. However, I had to import – because the performance of AMA was not sufficient there.
DP: So what would you like to see in future versions of Media Composer?
Tim Squyres: Avid has removed a few features that I really miss. For example, in previous iterations you could colour in parts of the timeline yourself – I really miss that feature as it helped me a lot with my overview. I would like to see two things in particular in the next versions: Firstly, I hope for changes to the audio track so that I can simply throw everything into the track, whether mono, stereo or 5.1. And I would also like to see a double output when editing in stereo. Another feature that I miss so far is working with resolution-independent material in a timeline. Then you could pan within the unscaled image.
DP: On the subject of hardware: What does your workstation look like?
Tim Squyres: My setup is actually standard, for this project I only changed the monitor: After the shoot, we took our Dailies Projector (Christie Real D) to New York and set it up in the editing suite. We also had a silver screen and a proper sound system there, so it was practically a screening room and editing suite in one when I did the final version with Ang. We could easily view DCP and DPX files. Because we often calibrated the projector, we were even able to finish the final VFXs in the editing room. I also edited in 3D the whole time – from the dailies onwards, to eliminate guesswork about the 3D effect from the start. The hardware I’d be completely lost without is my Wacom tablet. I haven’t cut with a mouse in my hand for about 17 years.
DP: Do you use any other software?
Tim Squyres: The rest of the team worked a lot with After Effects. I usually manage my sound library and sound effects in iTunes and we use cineSync and LifeSize for video conferencing and synchronisation. During the actual production, we had an Avid station in Taiwan that was directly linked to our screening room. We had this under control via screen sharing both there and in my editing room in New York. Since I commuted between Taiwan and New York, I was able to work anywhere. When I was in New York, I could talk to the people in Taiwan via Skype.
DP: How many VFXs were there in “Life of Pi”?
Tim Squyres: A good three quarters of the film is VFX. The previews came from the VFX studios as DNX-encoded side-by-side quicktimes, the final renders as discrete-eye DPX files.
DP: As an editor, don’t you almost always need a VFX background these days?
Tim Squyres: It always helps enormously if you are familiar with VFX and animations – to be able to assess what is possible or easily possible. In turn, it’s important to know what’s difficult or impossible to realise. One of the challenges with this film, in which one of the main characters is animated, was of course that we had to know what was going to happen before we started shooting.
In other words, before the VFX studios really got going. That’s why we worked extensively with the PreViz and already included the animal animation – right from the start. And of course the sky and backgrounds too. In my opinion, it’s extremely important to not only have the film in your mind’s eye right from the start, but also to be ready to see the story in the very first rough cut.
DP: What’s next on the agenda for you?
Tim Squyres: I’m currently editing an adaptation of an Ibsen play that Jonathan Demme shot in seven days. In the end, the film consists of two hours of continuous dialogue. So that’s the biggest conceivable difference you can have to “Life of Pi” (laughs). Variety is a must!
DP: In your opinion, how do you become a good editor?
Tim Squyres: Nowadays, a lot of people take a very technical approach to the profession – which is also a good place to start, and is definitely part of the toolkit. But at some point you get to the point where you have to realise that it’s also very much about telling the story in the right rhythm, about feelings and ideas that need to be conveyed. You have to consciously pay attention to that. In addition, I think it’s extremely important today that as an editor you’re not only able to edit, but also have good communication skills. You have to be able to talk to the studio, the director, the compositing, the Foley and the VFX people if you want to be a good editor. So if you prefer to sit alone in the editing room, you still have a lot to learn.
