Pickups

I am preparing for the pickups to be shot this Sunday, and one of my issues is the term, 'pickups'. In regards to the way I have always thought about shooting this, and Tidal Barrier words like 'pickups' and 'inserts' do not do justice to the thought and significance of these shots. (I have seen the word coda to describe Ozu's 'inserts', better).
But on...
The scenario:

She is in the living room, on the sofa, reading the paper, enjoying the weekend. He is off camera, speaking to a male friend. We do not seem him until later.
At first the conversation is somber. He is getting the friend's help in moving some things. It changes quickly. After the move? They will go out for drinks, and take up where they left off, before the relationship began it is implied. Then they begin to recount past exploits, which is of course only of interest to them.
All through this she remains in the living room, until she finally stands, goes into the kitchen and retrieves the vacuum cleaner.
So what she is doing this whole time? It is 1.5minutes. This is such as simple situation, and that is why I found so many different things I could do with it.
One idea:
She is neutral. Could be somber but from here can't be sure.
She is at the edge of the frame, extended out (her legs), looking down at the floor (which is out frame).
We hear him off camera. Low and somber.
Then his conversation changes, picks up.
She remains where she is, then leans over and picks up something. Dirt?! Is this what was taking her attention all this time? Yes, and now. At least this is what has been distracting her.
She leans back, takes furtive glance in his direction. Is this annoyance?
He carries on, boasting, and she looks annoyed.
A change of pace. She changes her position, takes up a magazine. Begins to read. For a time succeeds.
Then it is too much. He is too distracting.
The spell is broken. He crashes into some pots. She is startled, looks his way, then quickly away again. A moment she looks in front of her.
Then turns away from him.
Is she laughing? Yes, to herself, or at him.
Enough of this.
She gets up and goes off.

And I have several other different versions and and elements to explore. And only 5 minutes of film. Some hard choices...

Reconciliation and Haneke's form

I have been busy revising of the short scripts, Reconciliation. This is the short in which I am borrowing Haneke's form, from 71 Fragments, of one or more shots or fragments(some short, some long), which are then closed by a cut to black.
I am just realising the limitations of the form for a short. In 71 Fragments, Haneke as a number of character sets that he alternates with. This means that he can easily create texture and rhythm by moving from one set of fragments to another. In each fragment he has another set of characters, a different location, and potentially a different pace.
Because I want to keep the focus sharp I am sticking to one location, which means I feel there is no place to go. I just had a scene in the kitchen - what now? I have already been in the living room, kitchen, bedroom, bathroom, even the the closet!
In a feature this is not a problem.
I know, I know, I suppose I was really asking for it, taking this on.

I have now revised the script three times. Where is it going, despite my problems with pace and texture?
One addition I made, in part to defuse the drama, but also to make the story more focused, was to make it clear near the beginning that this is the day he is planning to move out. It was important that the audience is not left wondering what the events of the day are about, or how they will resolve themselves dramatically (it is clear in the title afterall).
I have already posted previously about how I have explored surface-reality in the story - packing, emptying a closet, vacuuming, doing the dishes. But my worry was that I also presented the couples estrangement in these everyday scenes - waking together (or rather not) in the morning. That these parts are not surface-reality, and may become drama.
I am now less worried about this. I might rationalise these elements as what Schrader calls disparity, the second element in the transcendental style (which leads to decisive action). I am happy with the story and I suppose the irony of the title, and how the reconciliation happens, in the mundane - he takes out the trash. I was most interested in how our lives are truly lived in these kinds of events.
Finally there is Schrader's final element, the transcendent:

3. Stasis: a frozen view of life which does not resolve the disparity but transcends it.

From the reconciliation - he, taking out the trash - to the macro view of the world, London at dusk, with lights coming on in flats just like this one.

The final codas of Ozu's films are reaffirmations of nature; they are the final silence and emptiness.

This is the first time we have left the flat, and looked at the world beyond the couple and their flat.