Submitted by JesusIsMyZoloft t3_yz2fg1 in movies

I've heard that most movies are shot in film order, that is, the scenes are filmed in mostly the same order that they will appear in the final film. This is done to give the actors a sense of continuity, to help with their performances. Some low-budget films are shot out of order, since the shooting schedule is built around the availability of locations, or sometimes even the cast and crew. But for the most part, it's shot in the order you see on screen.

This is even true for movies with frequent flashbacks, or multiple timelines. Even if something takes place long before or long after the rest of the action, it's shot at the point where it will appear in the final film. This sometimes necessitates redressing a set (and taking careful notes so it can be reset afterwards) or giving certain actors the day off, since their characters' younger or older selves are played by different actors.

My question is, are there any films which filmed the scenes in the chronological order they took place, within the context of the story?

For example, if HBO's Chernobyl was shot this way, >!their first day of filming would be the prologue in Bryukhanov's office at the beginning of Episode 5. Next they would shoot the reactor scenes, starting with the flashbacks in the courtroom, and then the sequence from the beginning of Episode 1. After that they would shoot the rest of Ep. 1, and then Eps. 2, 3, and 4 in roughly the order they appear in the series. Finally, they would shoot the non-flashback courtroom scene, and then the very last day would be Legasov's suicide from the very beginning of Episode 1.!<

Are there any notable films or TV series that were shot this way?

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

toofarbyfar t1_iwxowli wrote

Most movies are not shot in sequence. Doing so would be a logistical nightmare, with certain locations only available at certain times, certain actors only available at certain times, sets being built, sometimes travel involved, etc.

13

JesusIsMyZoloft OP t1_iwxrksq wrote

I'm talking about the super-big-budget Hollywood films that can afford to pay someone to coordinate said nightmare.

−8

mediarch t1_iwxv92a wrote

Big budget Hollywood films wouldn't do it because it's super wasteful to do it that way.

10

lizzpop2003 t1_iwy7jo3 wrote

Even then, that's not how it works. Filming is typically grouped by location and actors in said scenes. So, if there are 7 scenes spread through a movie filmed at one location you would film them back to back and if 4 of those scenes featured the same actor you would film those back to back as well.

This saves time and money because that set is already built and dressed and they are already at it, so it only makes sense to stay there till you are done with it.

8

Historical-Adagio-99 t1_iwyhx5c wrote

How does that make any sense? Why would any production company move the cast & crews and other resources back and forth to shoot same scenes, in the same location just because they appear in the final product at different parts?

5

justquestioningit t1_iwxvyxq wrote

FYI: The vast majority of movies are shot out of “film” order

11

Danxxx12345 t1_iwxptkn wrote

Dead Man’s Shoes springs to mind.

1

Alive_Ice7937 t1_iwyr8j1 wrote

The two part french film Mesrine is based on the life of a notorious french gangster. The two films cover his life over the course of about 30 years. Film one being during his twenties and film 2 being in his 30s/40s. The films were shot in reverse chronological order. This was to allow Vincent Casselle to manage his weight easier. Starting out playing the older overweight Mesrine and then gradually losing the weight as he was playing the younger Mesrine. Taking the weight off in a controlled rate was easier than putting it on apparently.

1