Table of Contents
Film editing in Hollywood is often the unsung hero of any film. Quietly manipulating an audience’s emotions, heightening an actor’s performance, all while guiding spectators through the story. Editing operates largely out of sight and out of mind of the viewer, in fact in most cases, it strives to remain invisible. Drawing attention to a cut or transition would oftentimes be a mistake, like a poorly placed comma disrupting the flow of a sentence. And considering the level of talent and professionalism in the post-production world, I rarely, if ever, find myself sitting in a theatre consciously noticing the editing.
So how does one judge the quality of something that actively does not want to be seen? One way is by looking at historical trends in the Academy Award category for Best Film Editing. By examining the kinds of movies that typically win the category, we can begin to understand what good editing can accomplish, what voters and critics value, and why this year’s frontrunner for the award, One Battle After Another (2025), may be well positioned for the prize.
Looking at the list of past winners you’ll notice that the Academy looks at large scale and ambitious productions when determining the year’s best edited films. Movies that lean on editing to manage complex plots while maintaining narrative momentum. This can involve juggling multiple storylines, shifting tones, or large ensemble casts that rely on careful cutting to keep the audience oriented and emotionally engaged. Think Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003), edited by Jamie Selkirk with its rich world building and various narrative moving parts, or Dune (2021) edited by Joe Walker who helped organize its world’s behemoth scale and incredibly complex and fleshed out universe. These are epic stories that owe a great deal of their success to the careful management of time and space that only good editing can provide.
But a film’s world does not need to be large to showcase strong editing. Narratives that unfold across multiple perspectives, simultaneous locations involving parallel editing, or shifting timelines require a skilled editor to keep the story clear and coherent. Without it, a film can quickly become confusing or disjointed. Good editing instead leads the viewer through the film’s structure, ensuring that each thread connects and that the audience never loses its way.
The Social Network (2010) edited by the duo Angus Wall and Kirk Baxter exemplifies this approach, moving back and forth in time between legal depositions, Harvard dorm rooms, and Silicon Valley boardrooms. Similarly, legendary film editor Thelma Schoonmaker on her work on The Departed (2006) builds its tension through a constant back-and-forth between its two undercover protagonists, using editing to maintain the rhythm of the film’s cat-and-mouse dynamic. These movies work as well as they do because their editors carefully organize the inherent chaos within these stories.
When trying to determine what makes a film well edited, the answer is not always purely technical. As with many forms of artistic expression, sometimes it simply comes down to how a film feels. Much of that feeling is shaped through rhythm and emotional pacing. An editor decides how long a moment lingers, when tension should build slowly, and when momentum should explode through rapid cutting.
Editor Tom Cross’s work on Whiplash (2014) takes the idea of cinematic rhythm almost literally through its intensely edited drum sequences, while the film Mad Max: Fury Road (2015) edited by Margaret Sixel relies on relentless pacing and kinetic action to propel the story forward. In both cases, the editing becomes the engine that drives the audience’s emotional experience.
These patterns also explain why Best Picture nominees frequently overlap with the Best Film Editing category. In the last twenty-five years, only two Best Picture winners failed to receive a Best Film Editing nomination. One such film being Birdman (2014), a film deliberately constructed to appear as though it unfolds in a single continuous shot. This informs us that successful editing isn’t just about going unnoticed, but more about being a behind the scenes force that holds a film together while striking the right emotional chords.
With all this in mind, it becomes easier to understand why Paul Thomas Anderson’s film edited by repeat collaborator Andy Jurgensen, One Battle After Another (2025) has emerged as this year’s frontrunner. A father-daughter story that balances a sobering perspective on the current cultural climate with an absurdist sense of humour. All while weaving together multiple timelines and several character perspectives. That kind of narrative structure places enormous pressure on the editing.
Yet the editing team skillfully assembles the film’s many moving parts, maintaining clarity while allowing the movie’s energy and unpredictability to shine. When viewed alongside past winners, it becomes clear why One Battle After Another fits comfortably within the tradition of Oscar-recognized editing.
There is a saying in filmmaking that a movie is made three times: once when it is written, again when it is shot, and finally in the editing room. The paradox of film editing is that the better it is, the easier it becomes to forget about it. Yet the history of the Best Film Editing Oscar suggests that voters are not rewarding that invisibility, they’re looking for the controlled hand that structures the stories we love. The winning films exemplify editing that quietly holds everything together. And each and every one of the editors mentioned in this brief overview accomplishes the same thing, they make complicated films feel effortless.
