By Rob Feld
Nick Emerson’s path to becoming a sought-after editor is marked by versatility and a passion for storytelling. Hailing from Ireland, Emerson began his career in television news, spending nearly a decade honing his skills before transitioning to documentaries and eventually narrative filmmaking. His ability to adapt across genres, from intimate dramas to thrilling features, has made him a trusted collaborator for directors seeking a thoughtful and disciplined approach to editing. His recent collaboration with director Edward Berger on the papal drama “Conclave” combines quiet drama with high stakes suspense.
“Conclave” delves into the shadowy and ancient tradition of selecting a new pope, unfolding within the locked halls of the Vatican after the sudden death of a beloved (and fictional) pontiff. Cardinal Lawrence (Ralph Fiennes), tasked with overseeing the sacred ritual, finds himself navigating the rivalries, agendas, and secrets of the Catholic Church’s most powerful leaders. As cardinals from around the world vie for the papacy, shocking revelations and political maneuverings threaten to unravel the process. Lawrence, grappling with his own doubts and a trail of secrets left by the late pope, uncovers truths that could shake the very foundations of the Church, culminating in an explosive twist that questions faith, power, and purpose.
CineMontage: Why editing as opposed to sculpture or dance?
Nick Emerson: That’s really interesting—nobody’s ever asked me that before! I was always into film, a real cinephile as a teenager. One day, I was watching “Taxi Driver”—far too young to be watching it, of course—and there was this slow-motion shot of a hand going over a table. Suddenly, I realized there was a job behind what I was seeing; I could feel the director’s hand, and I thought, “Wow, that’s interesting.” I actually wanted to get into cinematography at first. I was a runner on a short film and begged the producers to let me help after the shoot. They said, “Why don’t you sit in with the editor?” The moment I did, I fell in love with it.
CineMontage: Did that lead to a traditional mentorship experience?
Emerson: Sort of. I stayed at that place for a while. They did a lot of community-based video work. From there, I moved to another facility in Ireland—where I’m from—and got into television news. I worked in news for about seven or eight years, then transitioned to documentary, and eventually to fiction, short films, and features. I’ve had a bit of everything. That’s why I love this job—I’m always learning. One thing that stands out is something Terry George told me while we were working on a film. I was stressing over establishing geography, and he said, “Geography is in the mind of the character.” That was freeing. If Ralph Fiennes walks into a room, the way he carries himself and his expression tell you everything. You don’t have to spell it out. Another key piece of advice came from a mentor on a course I took early on. He said, “Do anything practical. Take every opportunity. Don’t waste time studying film theory if you want a hands-on job.” I took that to heart, and it’s served me well.
CineMontage: Tell me how “Conclave” came to you. This is your first collaboration with Edward Berger, correct?
Emerson: That’s right. I was sent the script and noticed Tessa Ross was attached as producer. I’d worked with her before on a film and a miniseries, so that caught my attention. I’d also admired Edward’s work, especially “Patrick Melrose.” When I read the script, I loved it—it was a thriller with something to say, offering a peek behind the curtain of this fascinating institution. I was immediately drawn in. When I spoke to Edward, we clicked straightaway, especially on references. I mentioned “All the President’s Men,” “The Parallax View,” and the other great ‘70s paranoid thrillers, and he got excited because he was already thinking in the same direction. That was a great sign for our collaboration.
CineMontage: Can you drill down into the stylistic elements of those films that you discussed?
Emerson: Absolutely. In that first meeting and throughout production, we talked specifics. The discipline in those films—the rigor of their scene construction—is something we wanted to emulate. Edward mentioned a scene in “The Parallax View” where Warren Beatty visits his ex-girlfriend. For two minutes, the shot stays on Beatty’s back in the dark, even though he’s the star. It finally cuts to his face at a critical moment, and it’s riveting. We wanted to achieve that kind of purposeful filmmaking. It’s a challenge in modern films, where pacing expectations are different, but that’s what excites me. Every shot, every angle must serve a purpose—no coverage for coverage’s sake. We spoke a lot about capturing that deliberate, disciplined style and just how much we both love those films.
CineMontage: How did your discussions about style translate into production? Did you plan specific treatments for scenes in advance?
Emerson: It was a mix of things. I visited the set in Rome a few times, but before shooting started, Edward gave me a detailed shot list. The voting scenes, for instance, were thoroughly storyboarded, so I had those as a foundation. During production, I was mostly editing in London and would send him rough cuts. He’d send back notes, often with challenges like, “There are seven cuts in this scene—let’s do it in three.” That was fantastic because it gave me the freedom to experiment within his vision. He wanted a still, deliberate approach in many moments, but at other times, the pace and rhythm changed dramatically.
CineMontage: How did those shifts in style manifest?
Emerson: Edward liked to include moments that disrupted the stillness. For example, right before Ralph Fiennes enters the papal apartments, there’s this rapid cutting as he breaks a seal. It’s very tense and puts the audience on edge before transitioning into a slow, deliberate scene of him exploring the apartment. Another instance is when his character is about to confront Cardinal Ladi. As he pauses outside the door, instead of showing him enter, we cut to the other side, and he’s already inside. It’s almost disorienting but very effective. These moments shake the audience out of the static rhythm and keep them engaged.
CineMontage: What was the footage like? Did he stick closely to the shot list and storyboards, or was there more coverage?
Emerson: It largely followed the shot list and storyboards, but Edward is adaptable. He plans meticulously but is open to ideas on set and willing to adjust when needed. That flexibility extended to me as well—he encouraged me to experiment. If I wanted to try something different in the edit, he was fully supportive. While there was enough footage to work with, it wasn’t excessive. Unlike projects where you open the dailies bin and find 30 clips, his approach is more refined. Typically, he’d shoot three or four takes per setup, sometimes five, but it was all very purposeful, especially for dialogue scenes. The coverage was always elegant and precise.
CineMontage: With such an amazing cast, how did you balance choosing performances while maintaining that meticulous approach to footage?
Emerson: Having a cast like this really freed me to focus on maintaining the voice and structure of the film. With someone like Ralph Fiennes, you can cut to him anytime, and he’s transmitting something compelling. Occasionally, we’d adjust the structure to emphasize a different inflection or emphasis, but we didn’t feel bound to conventional choices. Sometimes I’d suggest we might need to see a particular line delivered, but Edward would say, “No, it’ll be fine.” And when you’d watch it, he was absolutely right. Playing something where you don’t expect it makes you lean in. Edward’s visual approach contributes to this as well—he often shoots the backs of heads or unusual angles. It’s extraordinary because it pulls you into the character’s experience, almost making you strain to see into their eyes. That technique creates tension by withholding information, which mirrors the film’s themes of secrets and hidden agendas. He really thinks about these details.
CineMontage: What was the big narrative challenge for you on this project? What were you tracking?
Emerson: It’s a great script, so we had a strong foundation. But there was a lot to set up in the first half hour: the Pope’s death, introducing the characters, bringing in the cardinals, and the mysterious new cardinal. It’s a lot to manage. We shaped a montage early on of the cardinals arriving and the nuns preparing the beds. Originally, these were separate scenes, but in the edit, I suggested to Edward that we coalesce it into a concise sequence to streamline the setup. The biggest focus was tracking Lawrence’s journey—his character is the anchor. In ensemble pieces, it can be tricky to decide who to follow, but we made Lawrence our guide and told the story through his point of view. There were also some small narrative adjustments. We moved a couple of scenes earlier for clarity. Most of the work was about refining the pace—taking out bits of connective tissue and ending scenes slightly earlier to carry tension into the next. That’s where we found the success in maintaining the film’s pacing and tension.
CineMontage: The rituals and procedures in the film felt immersive rather than a burden to get through. They felt reveled in.
Emerson: That was something I found fascinating from the script—the ceremony and the process. I love process-driven films. One of my favorites is “A Man Escaped,” which is almost entirely about watching someone’s methodical actions. There’s not much narrative, but it’s completely absorbing. We embraced that with the voting process, playing the first vote almost in real time—though we didn’t show all 108 cardinals voting. It’s slow, deliberate, and that sets up the rhythm for the audience. When the second vote comes, we completely shift the pace—intercutting and speeding things up—because by then, the audience knows the process. Editing those scenes was so much fun. Dialogue scenes can be challenging, but sequences with sharp movements, like needles piercing paper and things being set on fire, are thrilling to cut together.
CineMontage: What’s something important to you about this project that we haven’t discussed?
Emerson: I’m most pleased with maintaining the formality Edward wanted while still telling an engaging story. It’s tricky to balance that structure with entertainment, but I’m glad we succeeded without compromising it. One thing I found interesting was our workflow. Instead of starting with the assembly and rough cutting from there, we worked in a very detailed way from the beginning. We watched the first 10 minutes and started refining that section, setting aside the bigger picture of the film temporarily. This approach helped keep me refreshed and objective. When I came back to watch the film later, I saw it with fresh eyes, which is so hard to achieve in editing. It didn’t slow us down either; we were prepared to scrap or adjust as needed. It was a wonderful, revelatory way to work.
Be the first to comment