Invitation to a Murder is a thriller set in England in the 1930s. It follows Miranda Green, a 28-year-old florist, and five other strangers, are invited for the weekend to the remote island mansion of billionaire Lewis Findley. As the weekend progresses, the clues about why they have been invited begin to unfold along with a sinister mystery. The film stars Mischa Barton, Chris Browning and Seamus Dever.
Kristi Shimek
Invitation to a Murder was directed by Stephen Shimek, shot by DP Brian Vilim and edited by Kristi Shimek. Shimek’s list of credits include Falling for Christmas and Peacock’s Pitch Perfect: Bumper in Berlin as well as the second season of Zoey’s Extraordinary Playlist for NBC.
We reached out to Shimek to find out more about cutting Invitation to a Murder.
How early did you get involved on the film?
I was involved very early on because my husband was the director. I was fortunate to be able to read the script right away and was in conversation with him during preproduction to talk about tone and pace and shot selection in the early stages.
How would you describe the pace of the edit?
Mysteries are interesting because you have a lot of time that is spent on implied meaning with the visuals, so you do have to linger on shots and moments more than you would in a high-paced action film. But I think those lingering shots are what give you the sense of thrill and potential dread and suspicion. It’s a really integral part of the storytelling when it comes to thrillers and mysteries, and within that framework, I feel like the story is well paced and moves along nicely.
What direction were you given for the edit? How often was Stephen taking a look at your cut?
Steve and I have worked together for many years, so he trusts my instincts and doesn’t mind if I play around with things. I love having that kind of trust with the early stages of the edit; it makes for a very creative environment to work in.
Once I had my first full cut of the film, we watched it together and talked about impressions and scenes that stuck out to us, as well as how information was being divulged and any structural changes. Then I would dive in for a day or so and we would revisit these highlighted moments together. We continued on like that until we had gotten it into a place that we were happy with. Then we did a few screenings and revised with feedback, and then we locked it up pretty quickly.
Was there a particular scene or scenes that were most challenging? If so, why? And how did you overcome that challenge?
Some of the most difficult scenes in the film were the ensemble scenes where we needed to be able to check in on all of the characters — this could be up to eight or nine people at a time. This is one of the most delicate processes in a movie like this, and I started by breaking it down into critical information that we needed to hear or see in the scene. Then I would build reactions beyond that to give us our sense of what the characters are feeling and thinking.
After that I would do a pace check to make sure that everything was still playing naturally and conversationally. When you’ve got so much information to fit into a very short amount of time, you can start to feel the scene slowing down, so I would always try to check myself and see if there was anything I could lose. It really forces you to be economical with your choices, and I think that was a really good exercise for the editorial muscles on this one.
I also had to be careful to never leave a character for too long so it didn’t feel like a surprise when they entered back into the scene. When you have so many characters in a scene it’s really easy to lose someone, especially if they aren’t speaking for a while, so it was really fun to weave reactions in that kept those characters alive in the scene and also added to the suspense and suspicion.
Since the film is a murder mystery, how did you balance holding back/giving information to the audience in the edit?
Deciding what information to give or withhold was the thing that we spent the most time on, and we continued to revisit this throughout the editing process. We talked a lot initially about what we thought we could lose and what should be included.
Once we had a cut we were happy with, we did a few small screenings where we would keep or lose certain details to see what our audience members with fresh eyes would notice or if they had additional questions at the end of the movie based on what we had kept or lost.
The screenings definitely influenced a few of the key pieces that we decided to bring back in the end. And even though they were small things like a specific shot, or seeing something from a certain angle, I think it made a real difference to the final movie. It helped me feel confident that we had included the information we needed while still leaving enough mystery for the audience to enjoy the ride.
What system did you use to edit?
On this movie we used Adobe Premiere Pro because it is the NLE that Steve is more comfortable on, and we frequently work in tandem throughout our process together. We both pull in assets for visual effects, music and sound effects, especially when we’re trying things out in the initial phases. Steve has a lot of post experience as well, so we frequently share project files back and forth when we’re working on movies together.
Is there a tool within that system that you use a lot or a tool that others might not know about?
One thing that I do in Premiere that is pretty obscure is when I’m trying to create a really realistic camera shake, I use the tracking information from a shot that I’ve stabilized and put it on the shot I want to add camera shake to.
In short, you take the shot you want to use the camera shake from and put it on V2, put the shot you want to add camera shake to on V1, then nest them. Warp stabilize the nest, and once that’s done, jump into the nest and turn off V2. It takes some trial and error but I’ve found it’s really effective.
I actually first discovered this trick in Avid. I needed to add realistic camera shake to a bunch of shots very quickly, and I knew that stabilizing a shot is basically creating tracking information for the movement of the shot. So I threw the stabilize effect on a shot that I really liked the movement on and then just added that effect to a bunch of other shots. It worked as I suspected it would. It took that tracking information and added it to all of those shots natively. It’s a little trick I use in both programs that has come in very handy.
How did you manage your time?
Once we’d had our initial viewing of the whole film, we broke the movie down into sections. So I focused on the changes in act 1 and then we’d review, and then act 2 and so forth. So we moved through in sections at first, and then took a look at the overall movie again.
This actually helped us focus in on the information that was being divulged in each scene which is essential for the mystery. We could narrow down what the dialogue and shots were really revealing, and then once we got through in these smaller sections we could look at the big picture again and track how and when things were coming about in the larger sense.
As far as my personal schedule goes, I make sure I take a lunch break every day and I try to go on a little walk or at least get fresh air to help clear my mind. When you’re cooped up in an office all day it can be hard to release yourself from the problem at hand. But on a walk you can gain some perspective on the thing you’re working on in the moment or even something that you’re wrapping your head around in a different part of the film. So I really try to make sure I’m giving my brain some relief every day.
Did you have an assistant editor on this? If so, how did you work with them?
I did have an assistant editor on this movie, and it was a unique situation for me because when they first started shooting the movie, I was on another project. So my longtime friend and collaborator, Katy Baldwin, came in and got the project prepped and did an initial rough assembly for me.
I usually do my own assembling, but Steve and Katy and I have worked together for many years, and Katy has assisted me before, so she knows my sensibilities. My personal policy is to watch all dailies top to bottom, so I still did that of course, but then I was able to jump right in with my editorial changes, and Katy’s assemble was a good baseline. It really was a perfect fit for this unique situation, and we felt like this was a good solution tonot lose too much time.
Beyond this specific circumstance, I am very collaborative, and I see assistant editors as an absolutely essential part of my team. I do have my assistants give input on my edits, because I feel like various types of insight give my brain something to mull over and consider. And I’m happy to give an assistant a scene to take a crack at as long as they are open to feedback and discussion with me about the scene they cut. We’re all continuously learning, and collaboration and feedback is one of the essential pieces of the job.
How do you manage producers’ expectations with reality/what can really be done?
Unless we really don’t have what a producer is looking for (like a specific shot), I’m happy to try practically anything. Sometimes, even if you have the sense the note won’t work, it leads to an idea or something that does work and could make the movie better. I also try to approach notes with the idea of figuring out what the note is actually about. Is there a problem somewhere else in the scene or film that is at the actual heart of the note?
I also try to be clear about how long changes will take, as a sort of expectation setter. Any movie can be iterated a million different ways, but eventually we have to settle on what we think is the best version of the story. Luckily, the producers on Invitation to a Murder are very collaborative and great to work with, so we had no trouble talking about what we could achieve with what we had.
How do you take criticism? Do you find yourself defensive or accepting of others’ ideas (good and bad)?
I don’t really see any reason to become defensive about ideas. The story is king, and we all have the shared goal of reaching that best version of that story, so if we can approach it in that way, as a team, we can have a successful experience.
Kristi Shimek
When I’m sent notes or in conversation about changes, I try to be absolutely clear about my thoughts and intentions for doing something a certain way while also being completely open to the feedback given. As I mentioned before, sometimes an idea that doesn’t really seem like it would work can lead to a really great solution if it’s given a chance. At minimum, a note can give insight into how another audience member may perceive the film and that can help guide where the film needs to go.
What NLE do you use most often?
The NLE I use most often is Avid Media Composer — it’s still the standard on many TV shows and films — but I’ve also used Adobe Premiere on many of the indie features I’ve worked on. They both have their strengths.
Avid is an absolute workhorse and a lot of the stability comes from time-tested structure. The project networking and sharing capabilities that have been around for a long time are such a strong aspect for a large team system. I started in Avid so it will always be near and dear to my heart, and a lot of my personal keyboard shortcuts are designed around the shortcuts I learned in Avid.
Premiere on the other hand is extremely flexible and has a lot of great effects integration in general. It’s easy to move between different workspaces and do a lot of additional work on the fly like color, temp VFX, sound and graphic elements, which are all common needs for editorial these days.
