Example collocations logo

Editing in sentence

1058 examples of Editing in a sentence

Sloppy editing and careless direction also adds to the confusion as half the time everything seemed out of sequence, while the other half of the film was constantly used up with these long, slow fade outs (which made no sense or served any purpose).
Bad acting, bad writing, bad effects, bad scripting, bad camera shots, bad filming, bad characters, bad music, bad editing, bad casting, bad storyline, bad ... well, you get the idea.
The sound and at times the editing and camera shots are low end of B-movies.
Picture's quality is very much unequal, the editing is one of the worst ever seen (at least by me) in the "swordplay" genre and finally the filming of the rare sword fight is very confusing and unappealing.
there isnt even any weapon fighting in this movie...that and the action sequences are just flat-out BAD....9 times out of 10 the other guy's punches and kicks come about a foot away from landing on the other guy's, and there are MANY times when the the movie will skip frames (a result of ridiculously poor editing)....the dubbing is as well laughable, and it is hardly even understandable....and we wont even get into the acting...the ending will definitely leave you saying "wtf??", however to be fair i must mention that the fighting techniques used by the actors were somewhat decent, and the old guy is a mad chump....but thats about it...thankfully i didnt have to pay for this movie, but i guess at least now i know exactly how bad a movie can actually be....
What is worse is that these fight sequences are botched beyond belief as Wilson's martial artistry is disguised by disjointed editing.
The film moves along quite well but the acting, direction and editing leave a lot to be desired.
It not only loses something in the translation, it is a total chaotic mess of editing as well.
Very good F/X and interesting editing.
The directing by John Pieplow (whose only previous directing effort was Jurassic Women, which I will let the title speak for itself) was uninspired and there was something wrong with the editing which resulted in the film being disjointed with a few scenes completely unrelated to the plot, unless the screenplay is at fault (which is quite possible.)
Despite the choppy plot, the film is not overly bad until its climax, where its amateurishness runs rampant (terrible editing, overuse of stock footage).
Bad editing, bad production values, bad continuity, implausible, bad dialogue... this movies is bad, bad, bad.
What's even worse though is the editing of this film.
Bad acting, horrible script (was there one?), terrible editing, lousy cinematography, cheap humor.
Less than stellar acting, photography, music, lighting and editing make it a real chore to sit through.
But you can't find a good copy of it, terrible copy full with green drops, the editing isn't syncronized, the sound do has sometimes that terrible hiss and sometimes you even can hear the camera recording.
The actual editing and cinematography are average, as is the directing.
Also, shame on Wyatt Smith for editing the film in such a way.
And the editing was very disjointed, so that the scenes didn't seem to flow together and they all seemed out of place.
The editing was poor and none of the characters engendered any sort of sympathy or feeling.
The acting was horrible, so was the editing, the dialogue, EVERYTHING!
Ghost Story could have been much more effective in black and white and in eliminating some of the more lurid special effects, and to presenting a more cogent screenplay (we should not have to be wondering about why the two trailer-parkish acolytes are in the script) The biggest detriment of the film is Craig Wassan (definitely separated at birth from Bill Maher) who from perhaps editing or just bad acting, is totally ineffective.
Everything from the plot, to the dialog, to the editing, to the overall acting was just horribly put together and in many cases outright boring and nonsensical.
The film quality was cheap; the soundtrack was muddy; the editing was ridiculous.
Unfortunately, although I did appreciate the film on that level, the acting and editing was terrible, and the last 25-30 minutes were severe thumb-twiddling territory.
Anyway... some better actors, a little more passion, and some more appealing editing and this makes a decent movie.
Hands, legs, and other appendages are cut with the skill in which the editing was done: choppily!
The editing is downright careless: Scenes just end, and are followed by other scenes that have little to do with what preceded them.
As a paean to American Filmmaking, it succeeds in terms of mood (helped by a few strokes of masterful editing segueing between time periods) and visuals (not helped by said score) but lacks narrative cohesion and fluidity.
The editing is good, and the director of photography isn't half-bad...those are the up-sides.
BackNext