Interview with Stephen Hull (editor)

What is your background?

After 20 years of wishing I were doing film work, I decided it was time for a career change and got a film degree at the Polytechnic of Central London. I've written, produced, directed, edited (obviously), done camera, done sound, acted, set decorated, composed the score, wrangled the budgie, swept the floor and just about every other job there is on a film set.

Along with two friends from film school, I formed a company called Image Engine (www.ImageEngine.co.uk) five years ago. We do film and video production of all sorts: drama, documentary, corporate, gay sex comedy...

How did you get involved with Fluff?

When I was a student at the University of Waterloo, I was involved with a theatre company called FASS. Several years later, Steve Hutton, whom I knew from FASS, asked me for advice about making a film and sent me a first draft of the script. I responded as brutally and callously as I could, but Steve seemed to like the abuse and so I continued to give him feedback as he refined the script.

What made you offer to edit the film?

A foolish moment of reckless generosity. In addition, I felt the challenges to an editor on a feature-length project would be quite interesting.

So, should other people who want an editor who will work for free go to your web site?

No, no, no! [makes wrist-slashing motion]

What does an editor do, anyway?

The editor takes the footage and finds the best performances and the best camera angles that work together to make a scene function as well as it can. This includes determining the timing of the shots, the shot order and which performances are used, but it also goes beyond that into actual construction of things that weren't there when the scene was shot. For example, I may take reaction shots from one part of a scene and move them somewhere else because they can bring out something useful there, or modify the way an actor says a particular line.

Why did it take so long to edit Fluff?

The short answer is that I wasn't paid. Much as I would have liked to spend my time doing nothing but working on the film, the petty day-to-day demands of having a roof over one's head, eating food and raising a child tended to get in the way.

What were your major editing challenges?

That's a very difficult question to answer diplomatically. There was a tremendous amount of chopping, shifting, and sorting to go on. A lot of the footage didn't work the way I would want it to work where I wanted it to work.

How did the experience compare with what you were expecting?

I expected there would be a lot of work, but not this much work. The quality of the footage was a lot more variable than I had assumed it would be.

How does being the editor compare with being the director or producer?

The biggest difference is the editor doesn't actually get to meet most of the people involved. I have this fantasy that some day I will be walking along the street and one of the stars of Fluff will walk past me, and they won't have a clue who I am. I'll stop them and say "My God, aren't you so-and-so from that film Fluff?" and I'll recite all of their dialogue back to them, and they will be so astonished that they have a fan who knows their work so intimately.

Do people ever tell you to get out more?

Now I can.

Do you think Fluff will be popular?

I think it deserves to be popular. There are a lot of things that I still find very funny even after staring at the footage for two years. But then, I should get out more...

What's next for you?

I'm finishing off a short film which I wrote, directed, produced and edited, called Ringing. I've also got professional work continuing and I'd like to find more time to do some writing.