Murch, W 1995, ‘Why do cuts work?’, In The Blink of An Eye, Silman-James Press, Los Angeles, pp. 5-9
4 thoughts on “Murch, W 1995, ‘Why do cuts work?’, In The Blink of An Eye, Silman-James Press, Los Angeles, pp. 5-9”
Though the title of this chapter is ‘Why do cuts work’, the content is mainly about that cuts do work. The article talks about audience’ s perception of cuts. Most people find no difficulties re-evaluating the new images. However, the cuts that are about neither motion nor complete change of context make audiences feel disturbing. Cutting widens the range of possible subjects of films, freeing filmmaking from the limits of time and space. It is the core factor of the shooting stage, filmmakers should always consider how to avoid its disadvantages and how to use its strengths. All decisions are directly or indirectly related to it. Another point to be considered is that even if all the conditions are available at the same time, it is still very difficult to take a long shot and let all the factors play a role in every shot. On the other hand, in addition to the convenience of the cutting, discontinuity of cuts allows us to choose the best angle for the camera in every plot point, creating a strong impact gradually through cutting.
This article makes me know about cutting. It seems like talking about the importance and advantage of cutting in filmmaking, but it is very useful. I understand why and how people accept the change of image, and cuts do work in a movie. Actually, cutting plays a key role in filmmaking.
The author shows a list of six criteria about how to make a good cut.1. It is a real emotion of this moment. 2. It develops the story. 3. It occurring in interesting rhythmical moment. 4. The Eye- Trace. 4. It respects “planarity”, which focuses on two-dimension plane and screen. 5. It respects the three-dimensional space of action. Generally, emotion is the most important one of those criteria. It is not suggested if director only focus on others criteria and give up emotion and story.
In addition, Murch asserts the cutting can sometimes create a new life and a soul. It is a fantastic thing, because through the cutting, the viewers achieve the instantaneous displacement, which they cannot experience in ordinary life.
Murch gives an interesting and quite philosophical insight into the art of editing and why cutting works. He begins by stating that the evolution of editing over the decades has allowed the cut to be accepted by viewers, despite the huge degree of separation between film editing and the way humans perceive reality. He goes on to suggest that the most successful cuts in film take into account the importance of emotion, story, rhythm, eye trace and spatial continuity, with emotion being the most vital component of the cut. Ultimately, he puts forward the explanation that cuts “work” because they have a close relationship with blinking, and therefore film can be closely associated with the human mind. Murch’s discussion of editing is highly interesting, and provides a very clear blueprint for creating a successful cut.
This extract by Murch describes his perspective on the essence of editing. He argues that most of the time the audience will have no trouble re-evaluating the context of a new image after a cut if it is either subtle change, or completely different. It is, then, the median-range cut that will throw the audience off because the image is not so different that they have to reorient themselves, yet not similar enough that the cut will go unnoticed. This lead to the discovery of discontinuous shooting as a valid production method, lessening the need for long takes and all film production elements (performers, props, set, lights..etc) to be working simultaneously, and perfectly until the take is over. In post-production, the editor is provided a wider range of material to work with, begging the question “how should this be cut?” and “what makes a good cut?”. Satisfying the emotional needs of the drama is at the top of Murch’s list when it comes to importance, followed by story, rhythm, eye-trace, two-dimensional plane of screen, and three-dimensional space of action.
In many ways, Murch’s writing is very similar to Dymytrk’s though Murch has put more emphasis on emotion and story as the primary considerations when deciding when to cut. As a result, Murch’s approach to editing appears to be more flexible as the “right” cut to suit the emotion or tone of the story is more open to interpretation.
Though the title of this chapter is ‘Why do cuts work’, the content is mainly about that cuts do work. The article talks about audience’ s perception of cuts. Most people find no difficulties re-evaluating the new images. However, the cuts that are about neither motion nor complete change of context make audiences feel disturbing. Cutting widens the range of possible subjects of films, freeing filmmaking from the limits of time and space. It is the core factor of the shooting stage, filmmakers should always consider how to avoid its disadvantages and how to use its strengths. All decisions are directly or indirectly related to it. Another point to be considered is that even if all the conditions are available at the same time, it is still very difficult to take a long shot and let all the factors play a role in every shot. On the other hand, in addition to the convenience of the cutting, discontinuity of cuts allows us to choose the best angle for the camera in every plot point, creating a strong impact gradually through cutting.
This article makes me know about cutting. It seems like talking about the importance and advantage of cutting in filmmaking, but it is very useful. I understand why and how people accept the change of image, and cuts do work in a movie. Actually, cutting plays a key role in filmmaking.
The author shows a list of six criteria about how to make a good cut.1. It is a real emotion of this moment. 2. It develops the story. 3. It occurring in interesting rhythmical moment. 4. The Eye- Trace. 4. It respects “planarity”, which focuses on two-dimension plane and screen. 5. It respects the three-dimensional space of action. Generally, emotion is the most important one of those criteria. It is not suggested if director only focus on others criteria and give up emotion and story.
In addition, Murch asserts the cutting can sometimes create a new life and a soul. It is a fantastic thing, because through the cutting, the viewers achieve the instantaneous displacement, which they cannot experience in ordinary life.
Murch gives an interesting and quite philosophical insight into the art of editing and why cutting works. He begins by stating that the evolution of editing over the decades has allowed the cut to be accepted by viewers, despite the huge degree of separation between film editing and the way humans perceive reality. He goes on to suggest that the most successful cuts in film take into account the importance of emotion, story, rhythm, eye trace and spatial continuity, with emotion being the most vital component of the cut. Ultimately, he puts forward the explanation that cuts “work” because they have a close relationship with blinking, and therefore film can be closely associated with the human mind. Murch’s discussion of editing is highly interesting, and provides a very clear blueprint for creating a successful cut.
This extract by Murch describes his perspective on the essence of editing. He argues that most of the time the audience will have no trouble re-evaluating the context of a new image after a cut if it is either subtle change, or completely different. It is, then, the median-range cut that will throw the audience off because the image is not so different that they have to reorient themselves, yet not similar enough that the cut will go unnoticed. This lead to the discovery of discontinuous shooting as a valid production method, lessening the need for long takes and all film production elements (performers, props, set, lights..etc) to be working simultaneously, and perfectly until the take is over. In post-production, the editor is provided a wider range of material to work with, begging the question “how should this be cut?” and “what makes a good cut?”. Satisfying the emotional needs of the drama is at the top of Murch’s list when it comes to importance, followed by story, rhythm, eye-trace, two-dimensional plane of screen, and three-dimensional space of action.
In many ways, Murch’s writing is very similar to Dymytrk’s though Murch has put more emphasis on emotion and story as the primary considerations when deciding when to cut. As a result, Murch’s approach to editing appears to be more flexible as the “right” cut to suit the emotion or tone of the story is more open to interpretation.