When postproduction stretches out to such unexpected lengths of time, it is natural to wonder why the hell you are doing this, and do you really want to keep doing it? In such moments, I've thought of those who have gone before. (No, I'm not talking about first world war vets, but filmmakers who spent inordinate amounts of time either on their first features, or getting their careers established.)
I think of Eric Rohmer, mainstay of the French New Wave, who missed the boat in 1959-62,and didn't get established until the late 60s with Six Moral Tales
, which established his career finally when he was nearly 50.David Lynch, who spent 7 years making Eraserhead
(And that was 7 years shooting, as well as editing; Folie has had 30 days' shooting overall, but 20 months editing.)Jacques Rivette, for Paris Nous Appartient
, which took a year to film, a year to edit, and then another year to get a release.Al Reinert, who spent TEN YEARS making the moon landing doc For All Mankind
. (And that was ten years of hell, from what I've heard.)And to cap it all is Emir Kusturica's teacher, who shot his first feature in 1976, and promptly died of a heart attack as soon as the shoot was done, so, we're not doing too badly. (Kusturica later helped get the film finished.)
It seems as though our hard work has paid off: people are already being affected by film, in particular the final half hour. That's good. That's what I want. I only hope the next one doesn't take as long....
