Don't only manage expectations -- put it in your contract. There's a billion things that can go wrong. Photographers and guests can jump in front of your shot. DJs can unplug your sound recorder. Police radio can show up on your wireless mics. You at least need a clause to the effect that no particular shot can be guaranteed, and also that you retain creative control. If you decide to focus on their faces rather than their hands while the rings are going on (or vice versa), that should be a possible choice for you and not a source of conflict afterwards.

"Putting that second camera on a SurfaceONE, just drifting back and forth, while you operate the closer shot, creates a much more dynamic interview for relatively low cost."

For what it's worth, I've contacted Edelkrone, and the SuraceONE doesn't yet have this capability. It can't back-and-forth between points A and B while doing horizontal slides.

About the issue of smooth surfaces, I've seen guys talking on other forums about bringing their own smooth surface. Eg: carrying a small sheet of plexiglass in backpack.

To say something that's blasphemous for a film purist, you can probably get away with bumping up shutter to compensate for exposure, especially given that there's little movement. No fiddling about with filters (which also means: no skin looking matte because of polarisation from vari NDs, and no moisture on the filter because you're shooting in humid weather). I've worked for a dozen or more wedding companies, and only one cared about breaking the 180 shutter rule. Still Motion did it all the time, and instructed people to do it in their videos.

Amazing video. Amazing images. Bears rewatching numerous times to study the different lighting and how it's created.

Something I consider important (but very few other people do): on a C100 you can record to two card slots at the same time, meaning you always have a convenient backup.

By the way, over the past six years, I've had at least two or three SD cards fail on me.

I think there's something to this God's eye view idea:

-- The camera is literally God's perspective, sitting in the sky looking down.
-- God is supposed to be omniscient, and from above, you do have more knowledge. You have the potential to see more context if it's a wide shot (whereas from the ground objects overlap objects and obscure your view).
-- You're potentially more distanced from humanity and emotions when viewing from above. Traditionally, cinematographers spend time worrying about how to make things look more 3D. In contrast, viewing from above seems often to flatten the world into 2D. A person or a tree might become a circle. What is more obvious from above is geometry.
-- If the geometry is harmonious, symmetrical, orderly, that's also kind of a God's perspective -- to see order in the world where a human on the ground might only see chaos. Whenever there is coincidence of aesthetic ideals and significant human moment, I think there's the suggestion of order in the world, and therefore a divine intelligence behind it all.

Of course, overhead is also simply an unusual, potentially quirky, and at any rate eye-catching angle. And I'm sure Scorsese often goes the other direction and tries to put you in the action rather than distance you from it. (In Taxi Driver he didn't want to use tele lenses, on the basis that they were too "aristocratic". Something like that.)