If you're interested in film beyond the secret lives of celebrities and cinema class rosters, you probably recognize the importance of editing in film. Reverse Shot has a new issue out that is packed with commentary on the subject called "Take Two: In the Cut." They state: "Even though the shot may be the most instantly relatable element of film form, the captured image isn't the exclusive domain of cinema; it's the cut, the edit between two images, that has most clearly defined the unique character of the seventh art." There's a lot of film fodder in there, so you might want to check out Green Cine Daily's excellent run-down of the issue first, to figure out what words you want to dig into.

In a discussion of Rope, Chris Wisniewski expands on a quote from Sergei Eisenstein ("Cinema is, first and foremost, montage."), and makes a pretty spot-on expansion of the importance of cuts and editing: "For Eisenstein, it's not just that the juxtaposition of two images or shots can be meaningful in the hands of the right filmmaker; it's that cinema is images, sounds, and moments of time colliding with each other to produce new meanings. The cut is not simply one cinematic tool among many; it is the essential characteristic of cinema."

But the collection of essays moves well beyond Hitchcock, also delving into everyone from Spike Lee and Bamboozled to Andrei Tarkovsky's Mirror. Personally, I'll have to spend some time with Jeff Reichert's discussion of Au hasard Balthazar with "The Eyes Have It." While I definitely recognize the film's artistic merits, I never connected with it. I even spent the first half of the film under the assumption that Marie was blind, due to that far-off look in her eyes. (I was quite surprised when she hopped in a car and drove.) All in all, the issue is a great discussion of many classic films, and it covers a great selection of talent, so you should check it out.
categories Movies, Cinematical