"The film has a collective hero; the Russian masses—the mutineers on the Potemkin, the people of Odessa, the sailors who mutiny on the other ships—who rebel against Tsarist oppression.
Despite the film's documentary look, it was very carefully constructed on every level, from the distribution of line, mass, and light in individual shots to the perfectly balanced five-act structure of the overall film. The most remarkable feature of the film's construction, however, is the montage editing.
Eisenstein's theory of montage—based on the Marxist dialectic, which involves the collision of thesis and antithesis to produce a synthesis incorporating features of both—deals with the juxtaposition of shots, and attractions (e.g. lighting, camera angle, or subject movement) within shots, to create meaning. Rather than the smooth linkage of shots favored by many of his contemporaries (e.g. V. I. Pudovkin and D. W. Griffith). Eisenstein was interested in the collision and dialectical synthesis of contradictory shots as a way to shock and agitate the audience."
Think about the above quote (from the essay by Clyde Kelly Dunagan in the handout I gave you). In 2 paragraphs, discuss (CINEMATICALLY) if and how Eisenstein's theory works. Be sure to use the cinematic vocabulary you have learned. If you need to, use your glossary in Looking at Movies.
In paragraph 3, discuss a film you have seen that uses discontinuity editing or at the very least seems influenced by Eisenstein's method. Discuss the film CINEMATICALLY as you would discuss a film we watch in class.
Here is a link to the film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TgWoSHUn8c
Eisenstein’s theory of montage, in theory, sounds like it would work well. By using juxtaposing shots and choppy editing will definitely “shock and agitate the audience” (Dunagan), but when it is put in practice, unless the audience is aware of the technique being used, it tends to look sloppy and hastily edited. In theory, by not using conventional editing techniques, the new perspective will shock the audience as they are watching something that isn’t typical. By focusing on what is in the shot itself rather than the editing of the shots, each individual shot carries more meaning, forcing the audience to think about what has happened more in depth than if they had seen a film that was shot similarly to other films they have seen. As a result of this, the film has a stronger impact on the audience and on the film world.
ReplyDeleteEisenstein’s theory of montage, in practice, makes the film appear rushed and poorly planned out. The lack of continuity makes the editing appear sloppy and the editor inexperienced. If the audience is unaware of the technique being employed, they may think the filmmaker to be an ametuer. Despite this, the film will still attain its goal of shocking and agitating. By putting focus on the “collision of thesis and antithesis to produce a synthesis incorporating features of both [and] deal[ing] with the juxtaposition of shots, and attractions within shots, to create meaning” (Dunagan), Eisenstein’s theory forces the audience to truly watch the film instead of just see it. Truly watching a film is the foundation for a proper analysis of it, and Eisenstein’s theory utilizes the human need for uniform, pattern, and correlation to compel them to understand the film and its message to the audience.
One film that utilizes discontinuity editing very well is Run, Lola, Run. In one scene of the film, there is a repetition of the phrase “the bag”. The faces of Lola and Manni as they speak are portrayed in multiple different angles, however every time the angle changes, the phrase is repeated. This is one example of discontinuity editing that is obvious enough to viewers that it creates a sense of panic and realization, instead of making the film appear badly thought out. The repetition of “the bag” created a strong sense of panic as after the first time it is said it gives the impression that the realization that the bag was let on the train the thought haunted Lola to the point where time stopped and all she could think of was that bag. The main difference between Run Lola Run and Battleship Potemkin is that Run Lola Run used discontinuity editing to create tone better than in Battleship Potemkin. Battleship Potemkin seemed to used discontinuity editing to hide a restrictive location instead of establishing the panicked feeling of those running from the firing soldiers. Using discontinuity editing is a fine line between good and bad, one mistake and the scene looks amateurish, but it can also be a great way to bring the audience into the film more and have them truly connect with the characters.
Eisenstein’s theory of montage works to get a response from the audience by the largely atypical combination of shots. Eisenstein “argued that film had its greatest impact not by the smooth unrolling of images, but by their juxtaposition” (Roger Ebert). Montage editing is atypical in the fact that rhythm often conflicts with the movement or composition of the individual shots, and the joining of these shots is unusual to us who are used to different styles of which we are familiar with today, or even the styles of the majority of the movies being released at the time of Battleship Potemkin’s 1925 release in the Soviet Union. For example, the rhythm of the editing when the soldiers are marching is “out of synchronization with the marching” (Dunagan). And in that same stair sequence we see consecutive shots of a baby carriage, someone beating something offscreen, and an injured woman. These shots have nothing to do with each other, but joining them together creates a meaning that is different than that of the individual shots. With the shots joined together, we could at first get the impression that the man is beating the baby or the woman, but we would not get the impression from the shots alone. To Eisenstein, editing is more important than every other film element, as meaning is created through editing.
ReplyDeleteWith this theory, editing overall is important because it is essentially the way in which a filmmaker guides the audience’s viewing and interpretation of the film. It is “not merely a method of the junction of separate scenes or pieces, but is a method that controls the ‘psychological guidance’ of the spectator.” (Vsevolod Pudovkin). The reason the montage editing is so effective is derived from this idea. With what we might think of as the “typical” style of editing (continuous), the audience intuitively, subconsciously, and more important passively interprets what they see on screen without active thought as the movie goes on. But, with discontinuous editing, attention is brought to the editing and the audience is essentially forced to notice it. The fact that we take notice to the editing encourages our reactions, which may be that of shock, confusion, or anxiety. This idea works well with this movie because we feel the anxiety of the subjects through the editing, more so than through something else such as the cinematography.
A movie that seems influenced by Eisenstein’s theory is Todd Haynes’ Wonderstruck, edited by Affonso Gonçalves. Wonderstruck relies very heavily on editing to bring meaning and connectivity to seemingly wildly different aspects of the story. Like most movies, the editing is largely continuous. But, there is significant usage of discontinuous editing that was initially confusing to me when I first watched it. Similar to what is seen in Battleship Potemkin, there are sudden cuts that interrupt the narrative flow. These cuts are intentionally obvious, and they are between two shots that take place in different eras, and therefore look very different. This stark juxtaposition of shots catch the audience’s intention to guide their interpretation of what they see. I watched Wonderstruck literally the day before watching Battleship Potemkin, so the discontinuous editing that was so confusing to me before was somewhat explained, and the influence was clear.
Eisenstein's theory of montage, which involves discontinuity editing to make the audience feel agitated and uncomfortable uses the juxtaposition of different shots that would not be cut together if the editing was continuous. In his film "Battleship Potemkin" there are moments, in my opinion, in which discontinuity editing is effective and others in which it is not. In fact, both examples occur in the Odessa Steps scene, which is the most famous scene in the film. In the scene a croud of innocent civilians rush down steps in an effort to escape the soldiers that are shooting down at them. In the scene there is a moment in which a mother stands in front of her child in a baby carriage and is shot. We see her fall twice, from two different angles. This is an example of when Eisenstein's method is effective. While it agitates the audience who can see that it is not realistic, it adds dramatic significance to the death of this woman.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in the same sequence there are also part where I feel that the theory falls apart. For example, the sequence as a whole is nearly twelve miniutes long. While there is no way the actual event could be that long in real life it is obviously extended by the editors. And this is quite obvious in the film. While I understand the idea was to make the terrible event seem to last forever, as it must in the minds of the victims, I feel hat it is poorly executed. While it did agitate me, it more annoyed me, and made me feel that there are other techniques that can convey stress such as fast cuts and frantic camera movement.
One film that I feel is somewhat influenced by this idea is "The Big Lebowski"(1998). The film features a famous dream sequence, in which the protagonist, "The Dude" experiences a ridiculously fantastical and absurd sequence of events while unconscious. This sequence uses discontinuity editing through the use of cutting shots together that don't make sense and leave the audience wondering how one became the other. Backgrounds may change drastically and characters may change their locations from shot to shot. This is used to confuse the audience and give the sequence a sense of sureness, which makes sense for a dream. This style of editing also fits with the entire film's absurdly funny nature.
What Eisenstein's theory of montage essentially comes down to is that, rather than hiding the editing to immerse the audience in the "reality" of a film, movies should make the editing as noticeable as possible in order cause the audience to feel emotions that more hidden, seamless editing would not be able to achieve. For example, instead of editing a scene to have smooth cutting on action, making multiple shots of a movement look like one solid movement, Eisenstein's theory suggests that the editing should use these cuts to show the movement multiple times. This draws attention to the editing, which in turn causes the audience to feel any variety of things, including confusion, a sense of being trapped, or anger. "The method is a purely emotional one", (Vsevolod Pudovkin), designed more to appeal to a viewer's feelings than their logic, disregarding continuity editing to do so.
ReplyDeleteOverall, this theory proves effective when put into practice. In Eisenstein's film, Battleship Potemkin, the theory is in use more often than it is not, especially noticeable in jump cuts throughout the film, but perhaps most effectively used in the scene where soldiers begin cruelly and relentlessly firing on the unsuspecting crowd. The usage of the same shots and movements over and over creates a sense of helplessness, as does the extended length of the scene. Additionally, by constantly shifting focus on the citizens, rather than sticking exclusively to one victim as a modern film might have done, Eisenstein reminds the viewers that the oppression carried out by the soldiers is greater than the people exclusively shown in the film. Though the scene may be confusing or frustrating to watch, especially for us, viewers more used to Hollywood-style editing, that frustration just displays the accuracy and validity of the theory.
Though this technique isn't extremely common, one film that uses it is Run, Lola, Run. In this film, discontinuity editing is used to create or emphasis stress. For example, the majority of the discontinuity editing is used towards the beginning of the film, when Lola speaks to Manni on the phone about the money Manni lost. This scene repeats dialogue, in order to emulate confusion and anxiety, and actions, to extend the length of the scene and make the viewer feel as if there is not enough time for Lola to solve the problem. One thing that makes this editing so effective is that it is not overused - as the film continues, discontinuity editing is utilized less and less, because Lola is figuring out what to do, and is more confident in her actions.
Soviet montage theory essentially states that editing is what creates meaning and drives the movie forward. Sergei Eisenstein pioneered this theory and was especially interested in calling attention to the editing through discontinuity editing. In Battleship Potemkin, the theory can clearly be applied. Continuity editing is evident throughout the film, although it is hard to notice as we are used to it and its main purpose is to hide the editing. In the first part, “People and Worms,” there is a shot of a man looking at something, and then a shot of a plate. Without the edit, these shots have little to no meaning. The man just appears to be staring into space because we have not been given the information of what he is looking at. The shot of the plate is just that: a shot of a plate. We don’t know where it is or if anyone is looking at it at all. However, when these two shots are edited together, the audience knows that he is looking at the plate and the plate has elicited a reaction from him.
ReplyDeleteMontage theory is also expertly applied through the use of discontinuity editing. Sometimes things do not exactly line up. In the aforementioned scene of a man looking at a plate, he smashes the plate at the end. This action of him breaking the plate is shown from a couple different angles. The action is repeated so the continuity is disrupted. This does not necessarily mean that there is no longer meaning. As with continuity editing, the editing still creates meaning. The repetition of the violent action of smashing a plate indicates the anger and frustration felt by the man smashing it. The agitation that the editing generates from the audience also allows the audience to understand the character’s reaction.
A film that may not have clear discontinuity editing but still goes along with montage theory is Synecdoche, New York. Firstly, it is a film with intentionally disorienting editing because at times it cuts and suddenly ten years have passed in the story (this is something that really frustrated me while watching). However, there is still general continuity. There isn’t anything that stands out like in Battleship Potemkin. In an interview with the writer and director Charlie Kaufman, he discusses the editing and says, “We used the scene with Hazal crying in a car as a reaction to the previous scene, but [it came from] a whole other part of that storyline that we cut out which involved finding a dog that was run over.” So, it is clear that both the film’s director end editor followed montage theory, as they used editing to create a new meaning. The character Hazal was originally crying because of a dead dog (a meaning that would have only really been established once a shot of the dog had been edited in, as originally intended) but the editor was able to take the solitary crying shot and use it in a completely different scene. These two things were originally far apart in the story, but the process of editing ignored the context and just considered the shots, allowing a new meaning to be created with the cut, as established by montage theory.
Einstein’s theory of montage is, essentially, the use of combining juxtaposed and contradictory shots within a shot to create an alternate or stronger meaning. In doing so, this discontinuity editing elicits shocked and agitated feelings within viewers, completely unlike the result of far more traditional continuous editing. Einstein “felt that montage should proceed from rhythm, not story” (Ebert). For example, one shot is normally filmed once in real time continuously from one angle, but with discontinuous editing, the same shot can be shown from every perspective and angle desired, then chopped together to create a new meaning.
ReplyDeleteBesides a few exceptions, overall Einstein’s theory of montage is executed successfully. In Eisenstein's “Battleship Potemkin,” there are countless examples of his theory. Perhaps the most prominent or famous example in the film, is that of a woman killed while trying to protect her baby in its carriage from falling down a staircase. The single event is captured in over twenty shots, cutting between visuals of the wheel teetering of the staircase, the agonized face of the presumed mother, the wound in the woman’s torso, the battle going on further down the staircase, and the woman falling into the carriage, all from different angles. The already dramatic nature of the shot is infinitely enhanced, adding layers of turmoil and heartache to the already tragic event. When Einstein shows the intensity of this single woman dying, out of all the others killed during the attack, through discontinuity editing, the pain of this single instance is able to translate for all the individual deaths also taking place. This proves to have a greater overall impact on the audience, inflicting more sorrow and sense of tragedy because of this small plot line of a woman and her child.
An example of discontinuity editing used to create deeper meaning and stronger emotion is in one of the ending scenes of Francis Ford Coppola’s “Apocalypse Now” (1979). The scene is the climax of the entire film, Martin Sheen’s character Captain William Benjamin L. Willard assassinates Colonel Walter E. Kurtz played by Marlon Brando. As Willard moves to complete his dangerous mission, Coppola chooses to show the activity of some of Kurtz’s followers, which happens to be the sacrificing of water buffalo. As we see Willard swinging at Kurtz with his blade, the scene is intercut with the slashing of water buffalo, emphasizing the brutality and fruitless sacrifice of war. The combination of these increasingly fast-paced visuals with the music of the Doors has a very disturbing yet compelling effect on the audience, one which I cannot imagine would be as strong without discontinuity editing.
Part (1,2)
ReplyDeleteEinstein’s theory works just as it is said to. The juxtaposition of shots can transform ordinary shots into a whole new meaning and this meaning can confuse, agitate, anger, transform the audience's perspective on what they are looking at. This montag theory focuses less on the need for realness in a film, but rather draws attention the the discontinuity created by the choppy editing style that Einstein describes. The most famous section of Battleship Potemkin (Eisenstein, 1925) that contains the ideas that he has interest in is the Odessa Steps sequence. During this long sequence, Einsteins theory holds true for the entire duration. In this sequence, soldiers are marching down the steps while civilians run away. The entirety of this scene contains an editing style that enforces/ makes us feel the intended emotions. Einstein wants us to feel as helpless and confused as the people running down the steps.
There are 3 examples in this scene that I believe really emphasize the power of Einstein’s method. The first example is present almost throughout the entire scene. This example is how Einstein chooses to edit the shots of people running down the stairs with the soldiers marching down the stairs. Almost every time we see the people running, we see the people running and just the people running, no dead bodies, sometimes we even see the same running shot 2 times, or even three. This differs from the shots of the soldier. The shots of the soldiers almost always contain corpses and Einstein chooses to repeat shots of them firing their weapons. The repetition and composition help achieve the effect that Einstein was going for. He puts shots together that don’t really make sense with one another. In one, people are alive, in the next they are dead, bt then they are alive again. We are meant to be disoriented and confused by this strange portrayal of the action and we are meant to see the true meaning behind this repetition and composition. Einstein wants us to know that the people running down the stairs are focused just on running, not caring about the people dying around them, while the soldiers are focused on killing and just killing. The next example is the interaction between the mother and her child that is getting trampled. This is incredibly well done because Einstein makes a point again to emphasize point of view/ emotion through editing of shots. As her child is being trampled, we see the mother react in numerous different shots. During the action of her son being trampled and her going to pick her up, there are: 5 shots of the child in pain of being stepped on, 7 shots of the mother's reaction or actions, and 9 shots of other people running down the stairs. I believe that Einstein did this very intentionally. The child's struggle takes up the least number of shots, because he wants it to seem like personal struggle isn’t as important as the larger picture. The larger picture is the hysteria going on around this boy. That is why there are so many shots of people running around him- because Einstein wants us to focus less on the actual boy, and more on the people as a whole. Going even further, the reactions of the mother are shot in very similar camera angles to one another. We seem the same horrified expression over and over. I am going to take a leap and say maybe Einstein chose to have her reactions in this way to show that this could be any number of mothers relating to any number of children. We already established that he is focusing on the broader picture, so why not say that he chooses to show the mother reacting in that way to show that the reaction of horror is universal in this situation.
Part (2/2)
DeleteThe last example that is when the group of people are going up to “reason with” the soldiers. When they are getting up, the action is shown in 6 different shots, yes 6, it is a large number, yes. I think this choice of the 6 different shots maybe Einstein's way of further building hysteria and confusing, but I also think it is a stylistic choice. Einstein perhap wanted us (as we identify with the camera lens) to be taken aback. He wanted to accomplish this, but a zoom is far too smooth and wouldn’t fit. So he chose to fragment the action into 6 shots all jump cutting to one another. This takes the viewers back but also makes us a little more and more on edge and confused.
A film that exhibits Einstein's theory of discontinuity to create agitation is “Run Lola Run” (Tykwer, 1999). During the scene in which Lola is desperately trying to think of someone to borrow money from, the editor cuts to pictures of people that Lola knows as she is spinning round and the music builds. We are made to feel as if we too are spinning around, thinking about who we can call, what we can do, time is running out! This is just what the filmmaker intended, and it exhibits the ideas that Einstein used in this films.
Einsteins theory of montage is prominent in Battleship Potemkin. Einsteins theory does work well in films if it is being recognized by the audience and if it is a way to convey that a lot of work in the film is getting done in a short amount of time. This does not have to be work, it could be the plot simply moving forward quickly but it is effective at letting viewers know what is happening over a short period of time.
ReplyDeleteThe techniques used to do this involve editing chopped up into short segments and very fast paced and to the point movement of characters or subjects in the frame. The editing style is direct and to the point so that the viewers have a better connection with the progress of the film.
A film that utilizes this direct montage style of editing based off of Einsteins theory is in Ferris Bueller's Day Off, when he is getting ready in the beginning of the film, a montage starts to show off how his life style is and his character as he is simultaneously talking about his beliefs and lifestyle during the montage. This is displayed cinematically through quick choppy editing and direct means of conveying the point of who the protagonist Ferris Bueller is and what he is all about.
Eisenstein’s theory of montage is a form of editing which attempts to play on the audience's expectations of sequencing and disarray them. In practice, this theory employs juxtaposition and contradictory shots to create a deeper meaning within the film. Oftentimes, this creates a choppy and agitated feeling within the film, as the editing style does not flow in a continuous fashion. This agitation may also be impressed upon the viewers, promoting discomfort within the viewers and in turn expressing a feeling of discomfort which the characters may be experiencing. Eisenstein himself thought that montage should be based around story as opposed to rhythm, and as such would utilize discontinuous editing to promote this storytelling.
ReplyDeleteEisenstein’s theory is used successfully within the film to create an understanding of the disarray felt by the characters. The most famous example of this use of theory is within a horrifying scene in which a woman is shot while attempting to reach out to the oppressors who fire upon innocent civilians. The woman’s child is killed, and tries to show the murderers the child in an attempt to reach out to their humanity. Eisenstein juxtaposes her desperate cry for help with a repeated shot of a scrambling crowd, which illustrates the endless ordeal which no one is able to escape. In fact, the woman’s pleas are met with more violence, as she is swiftly shot down by the marching executioners. By focusing on this one woman however, Eisenstein is able to capture and convey the emotion she has experienced after the loss of her son, which when juxtaposed with the scene of the crowd translates the emotion to the larger collective of people. This is similar to the meaning created through close-up shots, as by keying in on specific emotions it adds more connection to the characters on screen. The editing within this scene is also very choppy, which is reflective of the overall chaos of the event at hand. By expressing this disarray through the lense of editing style, the viewer is also impacted and made uncomfortable.
A film which utilizes discontinuity editing to condense time and space within various layers of subconscious is that of Christopher Nolan’s “Inception”. Because “Inception” follows a nonlinear narrative style, Nolan utilizes montage editing to confuse and disorient the viewer, paralleling the intricacies of the minds which his character are intruding. This discontinuity editing is also used to create tension, as an inability for the viewer to fully keep up with the narrative of the film allows for Nolan to place a feeling of impending danger within the viewers. This form of editing also allows Nolan to create a timeless, otherworldly feeling to his film, as the choppy and fast paced cuts dissociate his world from reality.