Why great filmmakers HATE this in a scene.

[@StandardStoryCo]

Want to make a great short film in a month? Join us at WRAPPED in 30 Days: wrapped.school

[@Alexgudmusic]

Good pacing

[@21stcenturyscots]

Waaaat? You are still here?! Where is yourr movie????! TTalking about it doesnt get you the Academy Award!

[@jermsbestfriend9296]

The version with what you called bad pacing was way better, dude. You got no anesthetic sense

[@jermsbestfriend9296]

Haven't you every seen Crank? Sorry to be so blunt, but I loved the focus trick, and the feeling that you might or might not walk across the room made the walk a nut. So I think the bad pacing "worked" better, if it know what I mean. Like the narrative made sense together and felt less schizophrenic, sir. Again,sorry for being blunt

[@GokuInfintysaiyan]

If you ever get a chance, I think it would benefit people to follow this up with examples by Sam Raimi. His movies can be the definition of "never a dull moment", and yet are still paced incredibly well despite sounding as though they'd be oversaturated a lot of the time.

[@tinderbox218]

The freeway scene in "Heat" works because we don't know Pacino's intentions. Is there going to be a car chase, a shootout, will he arrest him, kill him? That tense buildup leads instead to a surprise offer of going for coffee, keeping it unpredictable for the audience. Also says a lot about both characters that they're able and interesting enough to have a temporary "truce" to do that.

[@randygomez952]

Too bad they don't make movies like that anymore

[@mxplixic]

Thanks for spoiling it. I haven't seen it yet. 😄

[@cdubsoptional7849]

By this point in the film, we've seen the hockey mask/armored truck robbery depicted at the bottom of the movie poster, and we've seen the parking lot shootout scene where the still of Val Kilmer in the middle of the movie poster comes from, and we have yet to see Robert Deniro in sunglasses, as depicted at the top right of the movie poster. So there's no tension, and no surprise. I love the movie, but the diner scene is nonsense. The idea of getting coffee, and chit chatting, is not out of the realm of possibility, but you would never converse so cartoonishly ("I do scores", like give me a break). The climax of Shane does a really good job of depicting a conversation of this sort. And yes, I know that it's based on Adamson's account of what happened, which is not the same thing as being based on a true story/real events. I think it's more likely that McCauley was working for Adamson, who was trying to extort protection money from the tea company they kept robbing. Once said company paid up, Adamson got rid of McCauley and his crew, and invented this whole story as a cover, to explain why he was meeting with McCauley on the regular, and why he couldn't catch him until the end. Oh yeah, this bum who spent most of his life in prison, suddenly became a criminal mastermind. Yeah, sounds legit.

[@mutedmutiny9542]

There’s also a great bit of music supervision there that really enhances the scene - a cover of joy divisions “new dawn fades” by moby, which just fits the entire mood and vibe of the scene perfectly. Without that needle drop, the scene really wouldn’t have worked as well.

[@mutedmutiny9542]

@@cdubsoptional7849the diner scene isn’t nonsense at all, the entire point is that these are people and they don’t hate each other, and under different circumstances they would probably get along like old friends, but because of their personalities and what they’ve chosen to do with their lives, they’re cast as enemies that will fight to the death, IF they have to. If they don’t have to though, then they might just get coffee and hang out like old friends would do. This broke the conventions of typical cat and mouse, cop vs bad guy tropes in movies. You can nitpick with the phrases he used like “scores” but dude, it’s a movie, you have to make some sacrifices for the medium and for the story. I actually never had an issue with that because it seems like an inside baseball term that they would use to describe what they do. Like how else is he gonna refer to it, schemes? Heists? If you think of the alternatives scores really isn’t that bad.

[@ant1gonus]

I'm not sure about the examples he made. I actually think the "slow pace" one works better. That paused rhythm helps to convey the character's procrastination and lack of capacity to concentrate on work. While the "better pace" one feels choppy and tells an absolutely different story (the character doesn't really care about work, he's not procrastinating). Good editing is knowing when and how to use a slow or fast pace in each situation.

[@vegardpedersen]

Actually, I agree, we get to know the character more and see how he avoids it, THe pacing is not bad, could skip out a bit on the phone call, but it was not needed to cut away that much IN my opinion. But the second one was effective tho. Still, I learned a lot in this video, so thank you very much! I will try to avoid Shoe leather :-)

[@jcgorritti]

Exactly how it felt to me too. The slow pace example gave me time to understand the character and identify with him... the faster one really didn't work for me, at all.

[@ShangleLP]

exactly my thoughts

[@dinbali]

haha also exactly my thoughts

[@vegardpedersen]

@@ShangleLP I have to add, I think it is different when we have seen the extra footage, then we know something is missing compared to if we only watched the fast-paced one, then it might have worked just as good, but like Lord Of The Rings, you can't watch the original versions after you have watched extended version, as you feel like you are losing out on so much story

[@epochthings]

Honestly, the second example seems better for an actual film scene, and the first example works as a standalone skit (just my opinion). Scenes also depend on the context.

[@bangcolt]

The reason that Michael Mann includes the montage in building up to the much-anticipated first time that De Niro and Pachino share screen time together, is because it allows him to play Moby’s cover of Joy Division’s “New Dawn Fades,” which is awesome.

[@richlisola1]

This is the only answer!

[@almo2001]

Yes. And it ruins the movie's realism. :(

[@DrtyALGreen]

Should've stopped at Joy Division

[@Gearparadummies]

​@@almo2001 Yeah, the scene is so unrealistic it actually happened in real life between the real Neil McCauley and Chuck Adamson, the cop who took him down in 1964.

[@almo2001]

@@Gearparadummies It is interesting to know that it really did happen, thanks so much for the information! :) But also read up on the Tiffany Effect. Often, if it's so unbelievable that it takes your audience out of the moment, filmmakers won't do it even if it's real. In Gladiator, they did not have billboards around Rome for different gladiators because the audience would have thought that was bullshit. But it was a thing that really happened. :)

[@MatadorShifter]

Sergio Leone was an absolute master of shoe leather. Many of his scenes might sound like unnecessary fillers when you hear them described with words, but once you see them you realize they're really not and that this guy was a genius of how he made the viewer physically feel the surroundings where the characters were by delivering very specific material to the eyes and the ears. Once Upon A time in the West was an absolute pinnacle of this part of Sergio Leone's style

[@notanothershrubbery]

I want someone to make a movie where the point of the movie is found in the shoe leather. You are bored silly while it is happening, but at some point of the movie the number of uh huh during the phone conversation means something.

[@thunderb4stard80]

Literally, the first thing I thought of was the 15 minutes or so of near silent waiting at a train station in once upon a time in the west

[@RecDougs]

ngl starting the scene with him just typing in the "bad pacing" one makes the reveal of the flash game mid-phonecall really good

[@StandardStoryCo]

Yeah some things were lost by trimming it down, but I think the better pacing was worth it, especially if you imagine the pacing of both versions across an entire film.

[@maximeteppe7627]

@@StandardStoryCo I think for better pacing, you could have let go of the "no more coffee" plot point, as its not as critical in conveying low productivity as the watching TV and hovering above the keyboard without writing. The typing at the start and the rest of the procrastinating are also more relevant, and either need a bit of time for us to feel the lack of motivation, or a great montage.

[@skm6777]

Watched the definition of "shoe leather." In a local film event made in a town where a famous director hailed from, an entry had a guy in a trench coat say he was going somewhere, then spent minutes on him walking along the sidewalk at medium distance -- sometimes left-to-right, other times right-to-left -- until he reached the destination. I still remember those lost minutes of my life.

[@William.Driscoll]

​@@John-e4p1x Why-? Was it done well or badly, i your opinion-? ... Sometimes things done badly serve as a good example to wrap one's mind around & understand, toward avoiding said mistakes...

[@John-e4p1x]

@@William.Driscoll its a whole movie of people walking, yeah its good.

[@RSpracticalshooting]

​@user-zv7lm8uk7h looked it up, I find it hilarious that it's Affleck and Damon walking through the desert. I'll check it out.

[@MuttonChopYaz]

​@@RSpracticalshootingbased on a true story, someone actually died man!

[@TrapPhoneLoveMelodiesss]

😂😂😂

[@Markevans36301]

I’m pretty unconvinced, I think about Kubrick’s masterpiece 2001 a space Odyssey and just how much shoe leather is in it, it just wouldn’t be the masterpiece it is if there was a lot of shortcuts. He sells these long cuts with the music and intriguing visuals. I’m glad there’s been great directors out there that didn’t buy into your conventional wisdom.

[@ICLHStudio]

I think a really interesting set of counter examples to the standard 'cut out the shoe leather' style is to look at pretty much any of the Studio Ghibli films, there is so much care and attention put into the animation of tiny little shoe leather moments (I remember there being a scene in Ponyo that spends a lot of time on the mom putting the groceries away, and it works surprisingly well with the pacing of the movie); I think there's something about the deliberate and intrinsically exaggerative nature of animation that elevates these mundane moments to keep them from being the filler they usually would in live action.

[@DonPatrono]

it's less about that and more about the fact that Ghibli movies as a whole want you to be immersed, so they purposefully have slow sequences where you focus on these mundane activities. There are some nice live action movies that have those kind of scenes too, but the pacing, even if slow, is still adequate to the movie's flow. Now imagine if the breakfast preparation sequence from Howl's Moving Castle, instead of lasting a couple minutes, lasted ten or fifteen minutes of them painstakingly going through every step and following all the time it takes for the eggs and the bacon to be cookd, or if the scene incuded a detailed sequence of every single dish being washed afterwards...that's what shoe leather would be, in the context of that movie

[@kossemoore3342]

That is a technique in Asian cinema as whole. It's called ma. The filmmakers pick points of the film for scenes like this, they're typically there to allow us to take everything in. To slow down the film. It's certainly something you don't see in western film making ideology. Ma if handled well is an example of good pacing. I was thinking about this too while watching this video.

[@rizzo-films]

This is AWESOME. Something I want to add is that Heat does show characters do "boring" or routine things, but the way they're shown and when they're shown makes them significant. An example is that the whole opening of the film shows De Niro getting off a train, walking down an escalator, walking through a hospital and stealing an ambulance in a very dry, precise way. The end is eventful, but everything else could be seen as boring. It's not because, I think, it's happening at the very beginning. We don't know a thing about this man, so every second we spend with him is potentially revealing the mystery of who he is or what he's doing. By the time we see him stealing the ambulance, we realize that we've just watched a very precise and calculating professional do perfect work, a perfect setup to his character. I think as editors starting out are looking mercilessly around for slow, "boring" things to cut out, some things, if they're shown at just the right time and place can actually work. I think a lot of people are interested in process, seeing how people work and do things, so put that in at the right time and something boring or mundane could be brilliant. (not a critique on your video, just branching out on the topic. Great work!)

[@JakeWitmer]

Exactly. Which is why the "boring" process stuff works in "Breaking Bad" (until you realize it's sanitized and full of physics and chemistry bullshit) and works much better in Ex Machina. It also somewhat works in 2001...although 2001 is considered ultra-boring by kids and people who aren't even slightly interested in space travel.

[@jaggerlags]

I agree, a lot of “opening processes” can teach you things about characters and just build a tone the audience will acclimate to. They even show Val Kilmer buying the explosives so then you’re aware more than one person is up to something. You also see how he behaves a bit during the short interaction. As well some movies may need to let their opening credits play out and choose certain moments with little dialogue to play during these sequences.

[@NondescriptMammal]

Also, sometimes what might be considered "shoe leather" works well for adding tension or suspense

[@rizzo-films]

@@JakeWitmer 2001 represents the other kind of "boring": long shots that are seemingly uneventful and slow-moving scenes. If this is done right, extended shots build tension the longer they go on, and "uneventful" can increase the tension because things become less pradictable. You know something big and shocking is bound to happen, but the rhythm of the film doesn't prepare you for it.

[@jweezy15able]

I think that the slow pacing worked better for that example, but I understand that most movies have little time to do small stuff and need to cut fluff. I think having another movie scene you dislike for "shoe leather" would have made a stronger example for those of us who are brand new to film and concepts.

[@peterschilling613]

I actually also enjoyed the first version more - anyhow very good explanation of the concept 👌🏻

[@TucoRope2Tight]

Hard principles like these are the reason so many movies feel formulaic and boring even when they work as entertainment. I guess if you consider movies just as entertainment, it works, but that's not great movies, eventually good ones. Great filmmakers go beyond principles and rules. Movies are about much more than the story, otherwise they'd be books in film.

[@scottwatrous]

It definitely depends on context. First version IMO works better on its own (with some massaging maybe) or would be a better fit into a TV series where you have dozens of hours over multiple seasons to tell the story. Second version is more cut for a short or feature film.

[@ArchanDelon12]

I think it really depends on the pacing. The example he used played out more like a short story so keeping the shoe leather in it worked. But imagine watching 2 hours of that and it might really drag out. I think the idea is to write out these longer scenes, find out how long the story will take to tell, then start cutting out the most mundane of the shoe leather until the length is right and the pacing feels good.

[@N.E.U.R.O]

Sometimes it's nice when a movie lets you chill or hang out in a world, like in blade runner when deckard grabs a drink or is just reflecting on everything

[@FilmRunnerMedia]

I just rewatched Heat a couple weeks ago. There's definitely something compelling about that movie. At just under three hours, I was having a little conversation with myself wondering if everything in the film was completely necessary. In the end I decided that I like the movie and I should stop talking to myself.

[@edward4840]

I think the slow pace works much better (although it's not without some problems). The slower pace, allowance to let the audience actually laugh at the jokes and general willingness to sit with the performance to let your character lead the audience instead of the editor rushing through each moment all come together to make something which is far more engaging. I can't process that the character is lazy and distracted when you don't give me time to process that before you're rushing me to the next step. The first one gives me so much detail about the character, so much is learned about him and how he is avoiding work; the second one has an unclear character who I know nothing about

[@stevewilson9778]

Heat is the perfect example of a film that's equal parts style and substance. It is one of the sleekest-looking films ever, yet every frame seems deliberate and meticulously filmed. The performances are strong across the board and the writing is delivered almost flawlessly from everyone on screen. It is one of the quickest-moving 3 hour films I've ever seen or at least that I can think of off the top of my head. It seems like there wasn't a single wasted frame throughout the entire film. I know nothing about the technical aspects of film making. I'm just a major fan of American cinema. Although it's quite obvious why Heat didn’t receive all the top nominations and win all the top awards, that wasn't what Mann was going for anyways. It's an example of what good art is supposed to be: Mann made the film he wanted to make and it just so happened to connect with a large audience and is now considered one of the most important films of that genre ever made.

[@RonanAquilius]

I preferred the "badly paced" example. I don't think "shoe leather" is as black and white as explained in this video. Sometimes it's good to leave in bits that on surface level might seem boring but actually add subtle value to the scene. There is a false equivalence in this video stating bad pacing = slow and good pacing = fast. In my opinion the faster paced example at the end was the badly paced version, not vice versa. As for why I preferred the slower paced one, it conveyed some sense of humour in regards to his procrastination and his thought process unlike the faster paced version which just felt like a meaningless slideshow.

[@TOAOM123]

He doesnt make that false equivalence at all His first example is heat, for god's sake

[@patrickthomas8890]

I think the first version seemed better bc it was very short. The shoe leather would’ve been more apparent if it went on for 5/10 minutes.

[@Janus10001]

Actually, we've been waiting 40 years for that moment by the side of the road when DeNiro and Pacino are finally in a scene together. Mann must have known this on some level, and he lets that moment unwind like a sigh across years of dreaming and waiting among moviegoers. The brief car chase is almost meta in its likeness to a kind of foreplay, drawing out by the second that almost unbearable wait for an ecstatic release of wish fulfillment that transcends this story to achieve a historic moment for American film.

[@oscargill423]

I like this idea of shoe leather, because it leads me to consider Edgar Wright's technique: turn the shoe leather into something interesting. Wright either delivers mundane sequences in really interesting, engaging, often funny ways, or peppers the mundanity with easter eggs that are significant, if not essential to the plot.

[@NathanVMountain]

SSC: Tries to show examples of Better Pacing vs Shoe Leather Pacing Also SSC: Accidentally makes the slower paced version better than the rushed choppy version 🤣🤣 In all seriousness though, I get what he was going for, shoe leather pacing is one of the most classic "student/first time filmmaker" mistakes where they show 3 transitions shots of someone walking from one location to the next. But there's a difference between Shoe Leather Pacing, and slow pacing where you let the film breathe a little to allow the audience to sit within a moment you want them to savour or the slower pace just works more with what we are feeling with our characters. Tbh rushed choppy pacing is actually self destructive in high end entertainment because you'll find studios cutting out a lot of necessary parts that they will deem "fluff" and "not necessary", and then they wonder why everyone thinks the film is rushed and no good! No offense intended to SSC, I'm sure he knew all this but it just didn't come across his mind when making the video 💙

[@partyboi8773]

One crucial point all the commenters seem to be missing about this is that the example in this video is an incredibly short film. The longer version is about 1.5 minutes, the shorter one about 1 minute. Even if it's a little bloated, 1.5 minutes is never going to feel long and drawn-out. But the exact same proportional bloat for a feature film would mean turning what could've been a lean 2-hour movie into a tedious 3-hour slog--audiences will be bored to tears or walk out.

[@maxotto9877]

that fucking chase scene in HEAT with New Dawn Fades blaring is iconic

[@thatcherfreeman]

Avoiding this whole argument about whether V1 or V2 was better, this is an incredible editing tip that I wasn't aware of. I often noticed in movies that some actions would be intentionally cut out and other times similar actions are left in, and I wanted to know the rationale behind why they would make that artistic choice. I'll make sure to cut the shoe leather and hold on to my nuts whenever I can going forwards

[@watamatafoyu]

Note that some people make money filming shoes for nuts.

[@peperclipsfilms]

The joke of him playing games while he should be working didn't really land in the second version (loved in in the first version). Also the "Alright bye" was quite hilarious in the 'bad example'. Guess you have a hard time messing up a scene, which is good I suppose.

[@rndhoody2634]

The first one was actually pretty funny. You get the sense he really doesn't want to do those reports. While i agree with the video in principle, I think that showing character in the mundane is a valid approach to story telling.

[@autoteleology]

I actually liked the first one a lot better.

[@zacharyturner2944]

I actually thought the full phone call conversation was hilarious and I think it’s better with that in there. Other than that the second version was much better.

[@FabioCoelhovideo]

agreed

[@kissconsider]

Once u know the rules, then you can break them to evoke a different feeling

[@ronmackinnon9374]

I want the 'lickity-split o'clock' line kept in. : )

[@shrimpflea]

I disagree. The full phone conversation was BORING.

[@guillermovaccarezza7105]

A movie like Eyes Wide Shut it full of shoe-leathering and I LOVE how that builds ups a very calm, subtle tension that eventually pays off at some key moment. Thanks for the video, very insightful and informative!

[@patrickthomas8890]

I don’t think that counts as true shoe leather bc it does build tension

[@itsPenguinBoy]

I think of "Shoe Leather" as being about what beef you serve your audience... It's still part of the cow, but you wouldn't want to chew it, so you cut it out. I like that it implies some respect for the things we cut out.

[@dogflirt]

I got SO excited when I saw you had "Heat" in this!! Heat, is immediately the first film that comes to mind, when someone ask my favorite all time movies. Heat & Training Day are hands down my all time favorite Action/thriller/drama whatever type films. 🔥🔥🔥

[@RogerOThornhill]

You must not watch a lot of old movies if you don't know what "shoe leather" means. The entire phrase is, "it would save me some shoe leather", as in the private eye would have to walk all over town to find out a piece of information, and wear off some of the soles of his shoes, or the client could just tell him the information now and "save him some shoe leather."

[@WoefulMinion]

Exactly.

[@badinfluence3814]

You don't have to watch any old films to know its meaning, it's a common phrase.

[@arklowrockz]

Excellent video lad. Just regarding your "Nut Hand " analogy: You wouldn't move all-in with a nut hand until the river hand had been turned and you had sucked in maybe two other players with a lot of betting that commits them to the pot. You would do the all-in shove once the last card was up and everyone was pot=committed. Which to be fair is sort of the way the scene plays out. It is an absolute belter. My favourite bit is at the beginning where Vincent tries to play a bit pally talking about where Neil was incarcerated. Neil just shrugs. Get on with it.. Lovely.

[@micahnewman]

That makes total sense. Sometimes I wonder how filmmakers make their movies not boring, because when I imagine trying to do it, I imagine it turning out boring.

[@TheHardRunner]

The best non-goodbye hang up I can remember seeing is actually in this movie Heat. Al Pacino is telling his people to get everything set up and he says, "and I want it all up and running by tomorrow night," then pauses. Then he hangs up. That's when his character seems no non-sense, efficient and serious. It seemed to add drama.

[@urbangorilla33]

The thing is, the examples he gave - and yours with Pacino - were more believable because they show an authority figure speaking to a subordinate, or in the case of the Dude, him talking to Walter whom he's known for years and happens to be pissed off at. In those situations the brusqueness or lack of cordiality is not so jarring as it is with, say, husband and wife.

[@TheHardRunner]

@@urbangorilla33 Agreed. I can think of three things that happen all the time in movies and tv that just jar me right out of the experience. The not saying good-bye at the end of a call, especially with a loved one, as you mentioned. I can almost over look it though it has taken some time for me. The second, is the sitting on a couch or bed with shoes or boots on. I mean who really does that? You're walking around NYC all day in those boots and then come home and put your shoes on your couch cushions? Third one, The barefoot actor/actress who reveals the dirtiest soles you've ever seen. Particularly, the one who gets out the shower and in the next shot their soles are black (presumably from walking around the set all day trying to shoot that scene).

[@VashSpiegel]

The coffee house scene is my favorite part. It allows you to dwell on a characters persective, which sells there mindset so much better then the action could.

[@johnedwards2119]

The chicken truck/hose segment in "No Country For Old Men" is the only editing lesson any filmmaker needs to see.

[@matman000000]

This is just one way of storytelling, though. Many directors, especially in Europe and Asia (Leone, Antonioni, Tati, Kiarostami, Wenders), find beauty and purpose in those seemingly dull everyday moments. The opening of Once Upon a Time in the West is a perfect example of using very slow pacing to build atmosphere, characters and anticipation.

[@alexanderloeb]

Lolol 1:41 “A… 2… 3…” I was wondering if this was to prove a point about filmmaking 😂

[@thunderb4stard80]

I think that with the right sound mixing, score, direction or acting many shoe leather scenes can be made far more essential, whereas i personally abhor over-cutting. Whenever a long take can be used i usually feel its better

[@RisingJake]

Among the mire of KZbin, your channel's content is a highly excellent use of time. Thanks, fella.

[@MrShanePhoto]

The worst is when characters have obviously sat in a car together for 45 minutes and only continue their conversation once they're at their destination 😂. Its always so funny. Like they sat in silence for ages. I also love older films from the 50s to 70s were characters spend ages walking from one room to another through a long corridor to go ask another character a question

[@pbelancsik]

The fact that you don’t know the difference between where and were tells me everything I need to know

[@paulheap1982]

​@@pbelancsikyour statement tells me everything I need to know about you.

[@enigmawstudios4130]

I don't want to be "that guy" but the pacing in the "bad pacing" example... wasn't that bad. I was able to pick up relevant info about the scene and it added more suspense to what was happening. The 2nd version was quicker and hit those dopamine triggers, yes, but was confusing. Didn't know what was going on and it honestly felt more like a creative way to get through a scene you didn't want to show. (Disclaimer* This isn't a critique on your ability, as you are talented - just my take on watching it - the first was powerful, the 2nd was weak and easy)

[@StefanReich]

OMG you're THAT GUY!! But seriously, I agree, I like the slower version a lot more. It's how they shoot series these days, no? Better Call Saul-like slowness.

[@enigmawstudios4130]

@@StefanReich lol nice. But yes, some things are best slower. We (society) have moved into this stream-lined, smack you in the face and leave you wondering what happened-pacing for EVERYTHING! Even Sam Niel made a claim that audiences no longer want Stephen Speilberg's "Slow Burn" action, like what we saw in Jurassic Park... WTF??? Show me a film as good, with as strong a pacing as Jurassic Park written in the last twenty years, that did not do well, and I'll stand corrected.

[@imDonDiestro]

@@StefanReichme personally, the style of television and film that I like, I’m leaning towards that “bad” one as well. I’m a big fan of the show Atlanta and the “shoe leather” adds to the awkwardness of the show. The shoe leather itself is almost a character. I think it really depends on the genre. It makes sense for a an action film to cut so much of it out. But in comedy it’s like the the build up before the punchline.

[@partyboi8773]

One crucial point all the commenters seem to be missing about this is that the example in this video is an incredibly short film. The longer version is about 1.5 minutes, the shorter one about 1 minute. Even if it's a little bloated, 1.5 minutes is never going to feel long and drawn-out. But the exact same proportional bloat for a feature film would mean turning what could've been a lean 2-hour movie into a tedious 3-hour slog--audiences will be bored to tears or walk out.

[@andchat6241]

some good points .... unfortunately many films go for a big opening weekend $ return , and become 2+ hours of 'loud action ' edited like 2+ minute trailers ..

[@luckyluc03]

Came up on my recommended. I'm not a filmmaker, just a photographer with am excellent video camera. This video served as motivation! Thanks!

[@shawnwilcowski]

3:50 DUDE😂😂😂, that hand wipe was great subtle comedic timing

[@atraxisdarkstar]

"Here's why shoe leather is bad." *shows two examples, but the one with shoe leather is actually much better* "I think you see what I mean."

[@manufilms29]

After watching a few of your videos since yesterday I'm not surprised you're such a succesful editor, your storytelling craftmanship is amazing, I learn a new thing every time, and I'm just a wedding videographer from Romania, appreciate your videos

[@AllThingsFilm1]

Excellent advice. I was thinking about a short I'm about to start shooting while watching this video. It gave me ideas of how I can remove the "shoe leather" from the first scene I plan on shooting. Loved the "McCluskey Report" story. Many thanks. Happy subscriber.

[@5stardave]

Shoe leather is all that matters. Those mundane things in life is what gives a movie soul. With the price of tickets for a movie now, it should be the extended versions of the entire "Lord of the Rings" or "The Hobbit". The entire Alec Guinness version of "Tinker, Taylor, Soldier, Spy" or "Smiley's People" would work too.

[@eqilibrius]

16:35 Bro just rizzed up the entire Video... I think he got us by the nuts 😅

[@tomh.2405]

I think there's a also a great example in "The Silence of the Lambs." Right after the big reveal that it's Hannibal Lecter, not the cop, who's in the back of the ambulance, there's a quick cut to Clarice Starling's roommate at the FBI academy dropping a wall phone in the dorm hallway -- not even pausing to hang it up -- and then sprinting down the corridor to relay the news to Clarice. Great, efficient storytelling, with a lot of information being relayed to us in a couple of seconds so that we can move on quickly to a more substantive scene.

[@AnandaGarden]

Exceedingly interesting. I had to smile - I'm 81 and for me shoe leather is Broderick Crawford jogging heavily out to the parking lot and getting in his Highway Patrol cruiser which sinks six inches when he sits down. Then he backs up and the cruiser turns, heavily, and lumbers, heavily, out of the lot. Hey, thirty seconds of dialogue that somebody didn't have to write.

[@sargentocapitao9668]

bro I cant tell how many times Fox Mulder ended a call in Dana Scully's face, it happened like every episode, guy wouldnt even give her an "ok" to this day it always takes me out of the movie a little bit when that happens. That and when someone answers a question after changing scenarios, like they waiting all the way there to continue the conversation

[@CreepyBEEF]

The "Shoe-leather" in your "bad pacing" example I think made it better.

[@pablorivera7722]

Love the channel man. Great info. As a director of theater productions and now transitioning to filmmaking, pacing is everything. Thanks so much for this.

[@brianjcavanaugh]

Yes, the term shoe leather does come from exactly what you said, from hypothetical footage of someone walking to a place where we should actually start the scene. But it also applies to driving, etc. I was told about it from my old school Editor and friend who I worked for, who cut "Heat." The movie with the MOST shoe leather is Tarantino's "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood." That film chokes on it.

[@patrickthomas8890]

I think pure “shoe leather” are moments with nothing of value…Once upon a time in Hollywood had interesting dialogue, great music, or gorgeous visuals in the those low-key, mundane-action moments.

[@brianjcavanaugh]

Like during all that walking and driving? I'll disagree.

[@johns8596]

Tarantino loves shoe leather.

[@avaggdu1]

I'm curious what you think of some (quite literally) shoe leather: the entrance of Rachael on the first meeting with Rick Deckard in Bladerunner? In the context of the film is Rachael's long walk necessary to highlight how human she is making atmosphere, etc. override the pacing of the scene?

[@thomasdesandollc]

Great insight. I've edited a lot through my years but never looked at pacing how you described it. Valuable insight.

[@Flamewolf14]

I kinda liked the first one a bit more mainly because the answering the phone and the laptop gives a false expectation of working for me so when you see the game its funny. Another comment pointed out the slower pacing felt like procrastination which was spot on i think you could find a happy medium where you cut down the phone call and still have the typing and the "joke" while having it be quicker but still that crawl type feel for the procrastination feel. I also relate to the procrastination so im a bit byast, but you bring up a lot of good points many including myself should use for beter pacing

[@Pensive_Scarlet]

You know, when you pointed out the cut in Heat from the end of the chase to the coffee scene, it reminded me of something I've been thinking of lately. An overenthusiastic dedication to "realism" seems to be something that inevitably poisons every art form. Never saw the film, but just seeing that cut here in your video made me think, "I miss seeing this kind of thing in a film". These days everything has to be just so on the nose, a modern film would at least feel the need to put in some noisy montage of the cars pulling in, hitting their parking spots, doors opening, shoes hitting pavement, doors closing, one enters the cafe, immediate cut to the next one entering the cafe, cut to the one waving to the other, a seat is pulled, etc, etc. All that just to spoon feed reality to an audience that can no longer discern where it begins or ends anyway. All that to keep the audience from having to fill in a blank because we know that's the one thing audiences just can't seem to do anymore. Sorry to rant, I'm just kind of tired.

[@CinePals]

I was about to write about what I preferred in the "bad" example and it seems a lot of people actually really liked that over the "good" one. I think it all comes down to preferences. Also it's entirely possible that disagreement inspires one to take to the comments more often than agreement. When watching something, we don't normally have the benefit of knowing what was taken out. That being said, the moment I saw the second example, I literally said, "No," out loud. However, I think there's a happy medium between the two. The second one seemed so intent with jumping ahead that character and even just interesting moments are lost. The man working on his computer only to reveal he is playing a game is funny vs jumping into he's playing a game. There's nothing funny in starting there. The reveal is interesting. "Lickety-split-o-clock" is such a weird phrase I've never heard and it tickled me. I would have fought to keep that if I was editing. More importantly, the back and forth that was cut out actually builds a certain degree of tension. If anything, I probably would have emphasized this more with inserts to create a sense of anxiety over something we have all in some way experienced. The putting down of the empty coffee can was used in both examples to keep the moment with replacing the cover. As soon you have that cool moment of POV of the coffee can upside down over the characters face, I would have jumped to the shot of our character walking away, just after he pushed it away in frustration, as it actually gave me a sense of "nothing is gonna save this dude." Also, it was a cool shot. From there, you could actually have jumped to the over the shoulder of the laptop. In both versions, seeing the main character trying to figure out what to type or simply typing (as shown in the second example) didn't do anything for me. But seeing the laptop with nothing written would have put me in his headspace. Linger on that, then show the words coming out. And as we understand it's essentially garbage, that's when I'd cut back to him for some kind of a reaction of a positive realization. Jump cut to he's watching tv. Now all this nonsense I wrote above is obviously how I would have handled it. Along the way, listening to what Kent said (btw, I had to look for your name Kent, it should be in your description), I appreciated his insight and what he conveyed. The example he gave in his patreon content actually made sense when he demonstrated it. But like shoes, there is no one size fits all. It goes without saying, you can't indiscriminately apply the same rule to everything. A scene like in the example actually benefits from more being shown. But I think the most beneficial thing about this video was two things... that sponsored content actually seems extremely useful and the conversation this has started either each other in the comments or just with ourselves. It's educational seeing you agree & disagree with.

[@StandardStoryCo]

Good stuff. I agree, with the comments section going off on which version of the example scene was actually better, it's making people think more critically about what does and doesn't benefit a scene, and question themselves on the points I make in the video. I should start shooting poorly planned example scenes more often 😂

[@partyboi8773]

One crucial point all the commenters seem to be missing about this is that the example in this video is an incredibly short film. The longer version is about 1.5 minutes, the shorter one about 1 minute. Even if it's a little bloated, 1.5 minutes is never going to feel long and drawn-out. But the exact same proportional bloat for a feature film would mean turning what could've been a lean 2-hour movie into a tedious 3-hour slog--audiences will be bored to tears or walk out.

[@fuzzblightyear145]

I found it strangely nuanced. The first version made the guy look like a lazy, disorganised klutz, hen pecked by his boss, never meeting his deadlines. The second made him just look laid back with a "I've got more important things to do" attitude, and a finale of "screw this, i'm off" sort of hero ending. But as they say, art is subjective.

[@radfoxuk8113]

Fun fact, my grandfather, mid-late 80's deceased, born 1930's, learned to use a phone via movies, so he never said hello or goodbye, ever, there'd be a moment of silence, and then dial tone.

[@StandardStoryCo]

This is the best thing I've ever heard

[@TonyA552]

I'm pretty sure that the term shoe leather originated from police detective stories where they had to do a lot of walking to find and question witnesses to a crime, or to follow suspects until they committed another crime or met with another suspect. It is often drudge work, but absolutely necessary to finding the evidence needed to convict a criminal in court.

[@comicus6769]

Reminds me of one of my favorite examples of where lack of shoe leather is very noticeable. Take any episode of Law & Order-- "Where were you Saturday night?" The suspect always answers immediately without even taking a second to think about it. The inside joke to me was that all New Yorkers must have the quickest recall anywhere on the planet.

[@BaldPerspective]

Version 1 is better bcuz of the comedy-gold screenwriting like, "lickity-split o'clock," "get right on that," "keep ya posted," & the pièce de résistance, "we'll circle back."

[@imbykji]

I'm not any kind of filmmaker, but I do love getting into the mind of talented creative people (word order matters!) like this. I don't know how long I will stay because there's gonna be a lot of details I'll never grok, but happy to subscribe for now! P.S. You look like Ione Skye + Johnny Knoxville. Iconic.

[@12yfilms]

Great to see you again! Long time since I’ve seen you here. Hope you keep making more videos!

[@PaulTobelmann]

3:51 that wiping your hand on your shirt was genius! 🤣

[@watamatafoyu]

Shoe leather scenes work great if they define setting, character, and motivation. Tarantino films are great at this, like with Jackie Brown.

[@afrosymphony8207]

ok no no no, the "bad pacing" example is soooo much better than the "good pace" example. in your quest to cut out "uneccessary" scenes you've completely ripped every bit of character the story had to shreds leaving only information lool. information and character together makes a good story, i mean look at a series like white lotus, it has soo many slow paced moments and dialogue that film heads might call unneccessary but those scenes are absolutely crucial cause they reveal lil details about each character which just makes the story sooo much better nd engaging. This is a very good video nonetheless i rally learnt so much about pacing that i never even knew before.

[@Dark_Divine]

Your videos are really so much informative for me .... I am a young filmmaker right now working on my first film . Although I had made a short film .... All advice from your videos are applied there😇

[@ShogunOrta]

Could I suggest another definition of shoeleather? When they cut leather into shoes, maybe they have to shave/cut the shoe's leather down so that it meets the correct style of the shoe you're trying to create. Hence, cutting down on the shoe's leather to get the right shape/right pacing?

[@acinemalens]

Personally, aside from the phone call section the slow pacing fits much better into the story. The "good" pacing has a feel of not getting into the beat of the story where everything felt too fast; which doesn't really match to the feeling of procrastination itself. I seriously felt much more tense rather in the "bad" pacing rather than the "good" one.

[@patrickthomas8890]

I think he shot himself in the foot by making both very short overall…if the bad version went on for 10 minutes, the shoe leather would’ve been more apparent. When a movie is 90-120 minutes, every second can became vital in holding attention. If there’s nothing needed or interesting happening for long stretches, odds are that ppl will lose interest.

[@MBKill3rCat]

Hot take, I think the 'bad pacing' V1 scene works better, overall. Sure, it works better without the shot of getting up, walking to the coffee and walking back, but the opening definitely is better in the slower-paced version in my opinion, and the overall scene changes with the faster pacing, such that it no longer seems like the character is procrastinating, but rather apathetic and cba.

[@wolfgangamadeuskeen]

It's interesting how memorable the highway scene is. I know this film backwards and when i think of giving it another watch i always think of getting to that scene, and hearing that song.

[@tropes2087]

I would love to write a movie called shoe leather that's full of transition scenes people getting in and out of cars ,walking into building,saying hello on the phone... Even better would be if there was a story there. But all the story beats were missing until everyone is just walking away from a Funeral in the rain getting in their cars and closing their umbrellas...roll credits..fin

[@j-dided]

@14:37 I think I would’ve went from the shot of the laptop ‘McClusky Report’ to the clock blank TV scene to going for coffee. Then turning on the TV maybe I am setting tone as well as pacing.

[@SkylerB]

pacing is very important! you can enjoy more of what youre watching when the pacing is good. its like you can tell more and notice it more in movies. your explanation was fantastic and the structure of this video too, great work! i'll be subbing for sure.

[@tomlewis4748]

Very good. Your points are all quite valid. Another common definition of shoeleather is a scene that doesn't work bc it does not present the necessary elements of story. In that case, pacing is as important as always, but that really is a moot point without having those elements. Were that the case, instead of what you have being a story, it's only a situation. Your scene does have them. Inciting incident = client/boss calling to see what the progress is. Turning point = MC has to lie (bc we see him avoiding what he should be doing). Crisis = 'how will he deal with this responsibility?' Climax = he deals with it poorly. Resolution = he never finishes the job properly and likely will lose a client or a job. The scene has to have all 5 elements to be a scene (although the inciting incident could technically come in a prior scene and the resolution could come in a later scene). It has them. If it were missing any of them, it would only be shoeleather, and even if the pacing were terrific, it wouldn't work as part of the story. It's a little different in how you structure a novel compared to a film, of course. But the pacing principles still apply in much the same way. In a film, you can start a scene by cutting directly to your MC talking on the phone (and should). The viewer sees the phone and understands automatically that 'this is a phone call'. In a novel, they have to somehow figure this out, meaning they have to be shown that this is what is happening. You can't just cut to the dialogue cold. That would completely disorient the reader. If the scene simply starts with the dialogue of the phone call, the reader has no idea who is talking or to who, or even if it is actually a phone call. So you would need a tiny transitional narrative element such as the MC noticing the phone ringing and answering it (or pulling put their phone and making a call). But the pacing principles still apply. For instance, if your scene were a scene in a novel, it would be a mistake to mention the actual getting up from the couch and the walking to the coffeepot. In both film and literature, just cut to it. Amother definition of shoeleather is elements in the story that just are not necessary to tell the story. There is one possible issue here: Was the coffee scenelet part included simply bc the shot from inside the Folgers can is 'clever'? That may not be enough of a reason to legitimately include that as a part of the story. All the coffee part does is establish that the MC is procrastinating and not doing what he should. The videogame already establishes that directly during the phone call. The mindless TV watching also establishes that his behavior has not changed, after the phone call. Do we really need a third element to get the basic point across that the MC is an irresponsible idgit? The coffee part does have value bc it adds kinetic motion to the scene, but it also could be considered unnecessary, and fits that definition of shoeleather. Bottom line, pacing is important, yet meaningless if what is in the scene is not necessary to tell the story, or if the scene lacks the necessary elements of story. That's true in film and in literature.

[@petercofrancesco9812]

I have a gripe with FilmicPro. I purchased it a couple of years ago and paid extra for 10bit raw feature. Then they decided to change to a subscription model. Next time I tried to use it, it gave me the option of paying for a subscription or not being able to used the software I paid for.

[@StandardStoryCo]

Yeah that was lame of them. They still have a legacy app you can download and use your old lifetime license though

[@petercofrancesco9812]

@@StandardStoryCo Thx I'll give that a try. Btw, enjoyed your video.

[@michaelmeola3753]

I think one exception to this is QT (can't spell his name) a lot of his dialog doesn't add to a story but shows who his characters are. The no tipping scene I loved because it doesn't need to be there. Rob zombie kinda does this too.

[@aolson1111]

The opening of Reservoir Dogs establishes all of the characters and their personalities, therefore does need to be there. We cut from them at the table to them walking outside because we don't need to see anything in between.

[@johns8596]

@@aolson1111 Im on the fence with that scene. It doesnt really establish characters. Its a lot of useless stuff about like a virgin and a guy that doesnt tip. What does that have to do with their characters. Or the plot Its a bit self indulgent and doesnt really bring anything to the film. In what way does it establish who the characters are that means anything for later. Maybe the couple of lines between madsen and keitel and how they clash later. But its cool and references pop culture. And that's his thing. He does use some shoe leather to establish characters and adds some interesting dialogue between them. But they arent good examples of just showing what's necessary. Even in pulp fiction. Why Dont we just have them show up at the apartment to kill. Theres useless dialogue about europe and what they call a big mac. Who cares. He loves useless anecdotes and unnecessary exposition at times. Except for that it establishes the characters a bit. And adds a little humor. Then the conversation over massages. Again good interesting dialogue but in what way does it serve the plot. It does at least set up and pay off something later even though do we need it? Taking the bosses wife out and having her overdose is terrifying enough without the massage conversation. Which he still could have brought up while sitting with her without the conversation with samuel L Jackson. He likes that shoe leather, he uses it to seem clever and get laughs. But is it necessary or just forced for those sakes. Later they're pressed for time and tarantino has to have useless lines about coffee. A lot of it seems forced and irrelevant. I think as time went on he got better at pacing and cutting some of the dialogue, needless pop culture references and cute anecdotes that dont serve the films. I think his better movies are django and inglorious bastards. Which is quite the opposite of what most ppl think.

[@simonockas]

I always thought shoe leather was a term derived from it taking forever to chew. (Eating shoe leather was historically not as uncommon as it might seem.)

[@lachutequimarche8074]

4:38- It does always feel good to savor the nut we worked so hard for.

[@erikbrandt6602]

7:00 I've always thought the term was an abbreviation from something like.. "This is scene is like chewing shoe leather"... something that is uncomfortable, boring, and tedious. Eating shoes, or variations of it, was a thing people would say.. I'd imagine it's a depression-era euphemism or whatever. It then just got shortened to just "shoe leather".

[@ShyGuyTravel]

A lot of self-consciously arty filmmakers keep the show leather in, to an extreme, to subvert expectations or something. The worst example I’ve seen is a low-budget independent art film whose entire first scene is a man lethargically getting out of bed in the morning and going to the toilet. Films like this make me want to cry.

[@robertcoogan6421]

The coffee lid wobbling on the countertop: great! The silly game on the computer: really funny! Not really slower paced; full of comic bits.

[@castromusic666]

Anytime I hear rules I think of how they are made to be broken. In your example of the guy walking across the room, there are plenty of scenarios where a director may want to keep the long cut intact. Perhaps to build tension, or to show characterization through motion. That being said, editing is an art (and technical skill). Therefore there is not quite any "right" way. Take for example John Thornes BAFTA nominated 2015 film "Over". It is quite "slow burning" overall, with only bits of cuts. It that sense it challenges the viewer, but also serves the story in terms of perspective (think of "who" might the camera represent).

[@michaelmaloskyjr]

Btw there's a corollary to PT Anderson's pacing guideline that applies to other artworks: live music performance. All bands know they perform their music at a faster tempo then the crowd may be used to -- they drive up the live energy and keep the listeners on their toes with anticipation. btw shoe leather also helps justify the expense of test audiences and video of their reactions/gestures during the film.

[@wehosrmthink7510]

I knew that if I read the comments after watching this know it all video I’d get a massive number of equally know it alls expounding about what they knew all. I’m in awe at KZbin’s ability to get film nerds to nerd out.

[@racker9999]

I thoroughly enjoyed your excellent piece. It was clever, fun, smart, and informative. Your initial discussion about scene pacing, employing examples from Heat, was brilliant. Much gratitude for taking the time to create this sweet video.

[@Dancing_Alone_wRentals]

I stumbled upon this on my last video....I seemed together two clips just perfectly. As for the rest of my video, well it stinks like all the others but that one edit was on point. tHank you for a great video that really helps show the differences between good video making and my disasterpieces.

[@GabagoolForeverAndAlways]

Sometimes, how a character approaches another can tell you a lot about them. It really does depend on what type of film you’re making. Like, consider that iconic scene in 'No Country for Old Men' where Javier Bardem’s character, Anton Chigurh, gets arrested and is taken to the police station. The 'shoe leather' in this bit really lets the audience in on a lot about Chigurh’s character. How he lets himself be caught, goes along with the police, and waits patiently for that perfect moment to strike, which, when it happens, is downright chilling. Going by what this video is saying, scenes like this would be a no-go, but honestly, it’s moments like these that made 'No Country for Old Men' so great.

[@imbrod]

2 thoughts about "shoe leather": First, I enjoy it when it's necessary for me as an audience to process the scene that just happened, some particular dialogue etc. I need my shoe leather then, e.g. some long drive in a car. Second, Jim Jarmusch made most of his films (especially early ones) mostly out of shoe leather. Critics loved his work.

[@honorless1719]

The fact that the character's HEAT is based off of actually did have a conversation just like this helps immensely. It's about as perfect as a movie can get, I h8te people that say "What about Val Kilmer's character?" He got away but a guy like that will either get busted/killed eventually or completely disappear no other options.

[@ilovebutterstuff]

Story- telling is an art. There are many aspects to it, but the goal is to get from point A to point B without losing the viewer. Expectations within innovations. Excellent video. 👍

[@SirDavidAsher]

I honestly thought when this video started that "Shoe leather" shouldn't be added in dialogue. Great video!

[@badinfluence3814]

There are ao many moments in 'Heat' where characters hang-up without saying goodbye, particularly from Pacino's character.

[@treyborn2931]

I think the first scene works better as a comedy …as in comedy you cannot jump straight to the punch line you need a bit of shoe leather to help load up the punch line

[@weeklyfascination]

It always makes me cringe when a character in a movie or TV show doesn't say goodbye, but just hangs up. But after hearing your explanation, it makes sense.

[@MadMonkMani]

Awesome video man. Love this type of stuff. Really glad I clicked over from watching some software technical skills stuff. Been looking for more of this type of content. Subscribed.

[@AustinNGrayson]

I’ve never really minded shoe leather. Sometimes those little things give you a better look into a character and how they live they’re daily life. Obviously if it’s just ridiculously long and boring then yeah it’s a bit too much.

[@jaggerlags]

The driving montage before the coffee scene always struck me as a little excessive and even a stylistic break from the rest of the films realism. I know someone who thought the coffee scene itself was unrealistic but I found it believable enough that those two could sit together without whining or fighting physically. Either way I would change very little about Heat, it’s pretty much a masterpiece.

[@JohnnyNJones]

The first version was way better than the edited version Someone in the comments had talked about Quentin Tarantino and how he used Mundane activities as the bread and butter of his films. I don’t think this is clear-cut advice If I had a rule of thumb I think it would be it doesn’t matter how fast or slow the scene is. It’s about the intention of the scene and the emotion of the scene and whether or not it’s crucial to the plot The humdrum pacing of the First version of your movie actually allowed for bonding between the character in the audience as well as humor and it’s enough time to think through And analyze this persons lifestyle and what their thoughts may be. The second version doesn’t give you much to go on, there’s no basking in the story because it’s too quick. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with letting the audience in on the joke. Trying to keep people guessing is less realistic to a true story. Guy steals a car, cop pulls him over. He goes to jail. Very predictable plot But there’s so much ambiguity to fill with emotion and personal decisions

[@GranulatedStuff]

Made myself chuckle reminiscing about the 4 minute motorway driving scene in Solaris