Hacker News Reader

Comment by WalterBright | Hacker News Reader

Nope, I've never done any acting. But Director Clint Eastwood has a reputation for "one take" and seems to disagree with you:

"Everybody's heard those nightmare stories of somebody doing a take 20, 30, 40 times. Other than obvious errors like forgetting a line, often I can't see any difference between take one and take 20."

https://www.dga.org/Craft/DGAQ/All-Articles/0309-Sept-2003/C...

View on HN

That’s great that Clint Eastwood personally prefers that style, but that doesn’t make it universally true nor does it mean that other directors would have the same results with one take. The negative effects of stifling a director by placing this artificial constraint would probably counteract any positives of having two versions.

Agreed. All the directors I have worked with have required multiple takes for certain scenes. The cost of an additional take is small and the reward of a better shot greatly outweighs that cost.

> The cost of an additional take is small

Exactly my point!

> the reward of a better shot greatly outweighs that cost

My point, too, the "better shot" being the improvement of the lips and voice matching the movement and action. Consider that the English language market is most of the world.

I get what you are saying but to retake a well shot scene in order to have a better dubbing experience doesn't make sense. I encourage you to make a film to test your idea, though :)

> doesn't make sense

I've seen it done, don't recall which movie it was.

> make a film

I'd love to do that. Wanna finance me?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com