Pearlman, K. 2009 Cutting Rhythms , Focal Press, MA USA (Especially “Chapter 9: Style”, pp. 153-180)
5 thoughts on “Pearlman, K. 2009 Cutting Rhythms , Focal Press, MA USA (Especially “Chapter 9: Style”, pp. 153-180)”
This chapter, as its name says, basically introduces the different editing styles in filmmaking. To make it more understandable, the author starts with the basic concept of the terms like style, montage, collision and decoupage and then goes to the history of film editing. With introducing the most representative cases and directors, it offers us a great experience of how editing methods and techniques have developed during 20th century, such as, from Eisenstein’s Collision and his contemporary filmmaker Pudovkin’s Linkage to Decoupage of classic French films, then finally comes to contemporary style after the New Wave. The explanation is brilliant. I agree with the author’s idea that style means choice and choice means possibility. Editing is a creative work and in order to have creative conversation here, we need to study those styles as reference.
Pearlman suggests ‘style’ is determined by where the material sits on a perpendicular spectrum from collision to linkage and montage to decoupage. She explains montage as an assembly of images, often unrelated in time and space, cut rhythmically to allow the audience to surmise the message through associations. This is at the opposite end of the spectrum to decoupage which Pearlman explains as when the filmmaker takes many shots at various times and various setups around the space in order to create the impression of the piece being at a single place and time. This technique is utilised for the sake of keeping the rhythm of the film. This piece only touched on the broad subject of montage and so further research will be required for a specific breakdown. However the idea of montage styles on a spectrum is an interesting topic to look further into.
In this chapter, Pearlman puts forward a detailed discussion of the relationships between montage, decoupage, linkage and collision and how these elements affect film style. She creates two “ranges” or spectrums, where montage and decoupage are placed at opposite ends, as well as linkage and collision. She combines these two spectrums as a way of illustrating the differences in style between various films. She describes how the choices that are made in the editing process create a distinct rhythm that varies from film to film. It is this rhythm that she believes shapes the “movement of images, events and emotions to give rise to ideas”. Pearlman provides an interesting take on the idea of style, and a potentially useful method of illustrating, or even measuring, different stylistic choices.
In this chapter, Pearlman defines ‘editing style’ as a series of choices that sit between two spectrums; the first spectrum being montage and decoupage, and the second being collision and linkage. He highlights the fact that whilst montage and collision are generally considered to go hand in hand, this is not necessarily the case, and the same goes with decoupage and linkage. There are multiple case studies that Pearlman uses to highlight how these two spectrums work together to allow an editor to control a sequence’s time, space and energy.
Pearlman evaluates both spectrums individually, providing a detailed analysis of montage, decoupage, collision as both individual constructs and as a collective. The case studies demonstrate how the the two spectrums can work together to achieve completely unique outcomes, utilising editing techniques such as dissolves and ellipses to create different meanings in time, energy and space. Pearlman further explains that the relationship between elements such as lighting, camera angles and camera movement help create different rhythms in certain sequences.
This chapter is particularly useful because it explains how these different concepts can work together to shape how the time, energy and movement of a film are perceived by the audience. Whilst it doesn’t explicitly talk about the construction of the shot, it does detail how important the cutting of said shots are. Pearlman details how ‘style’ is a set of choices, and that these choices sit within a range from montage to decoupage and from collision to linkage, and the way in which a sequence ‘feels’ is completely up to the way in which the editor links the two spectrums. The shots can be edited in a variety of ways to express a different meaning. This is useful when wanting to control the time, energy and movement of a sequence or film.
Pearlman’s chapter on style introduces her perspective on how editing styles can be categorised along 2 spectrums. On one axis, montage and decoupage sit on opposite ends, on the other, collision and linkage. For the purpose of her analysis, she defines these terms in a slightly different manner to how they may usually be understood. Montage is described as being the assembly of material unrelated in time and space whereas decoupage is the separating of a scene that is continuous. Collision is regarded as difference in the visual or symbolic qualities between shots, contrasting linkage which is the “smooth” transition between. She offers the two spectrums as a way of bringing “common terms of reference” for creatives to discuss editing style, and the range of possibilities in editing. Pearlman argues that there are ways for seemingly contradicting combinations, such as montage-linkage and decoupage-collision. For the former, she uses a film trailer as an example of montage-linkage, and the famous murder scene in Psycho for decoupage-collision.
Personally, I found Pearlman’s writing particularly insightful in providing ways to think about editing. Her decoupage-collision combination is especially interesting, and also connects to some of McCloud’s ideas in Understanding Comics.
This chapter, as its name says, basically introduces the different editing styles in filmmaking. To make it more understandable, the author starts with the basic concept of the terms like style, montage, collision and decoupage and then goes to the history of film editing. With introducing the most representative cases and directors, it offers us a great experience of how editing methods and techniques have developed during 20th century, such as, from Eisenstein’s Collision and his contemporary filmmaker Pudovkin’s Linkage to Decoupage of classic French films, then finally comes to contemporary style after the New Wave. The explanation is brilliant. I agree with the author’s idea that style means choice and choice means possibility. Editing is a creative work and in order to have creative conversation here, we need to study those styles as reference.
Pearlman suggests ‘style’ is determined by where the material sits on a perpendicular spectrum from collision to linkage and montage to decoupage. She explains montage as an assembly of images, often unrelated in time and space, cut rhythmically to allow the audience to surmise the message through associations. This is at the opposite end of the spectrum to decoupage which Pearlman explains as when the filmmaker takes many shots at various times and various setups around the space in order to create the impression of the piece being at a single place and time. This technique is utilised for the sake of keeping the rhythm of the film. This piece only touched on the broad subject of montage and so further research will be required for a specific breakdown. However the idea of montage styles on a spectrum is an interesting topic to look further into.
In this chapter, Pearlman puts forward a detailed discussion of the relationships between montage, decoupage, linkage and collision and how these elements affect film style. She creates two “ranges” or spectrums, where montage and decoupage are placed at opposite ends, as well as linkage and collision. She combines these two spectrums as a way of illustrating the differences in style between various films. She describes how the choices that are made in the editing process create a distinct rhythm that varies from film to film. It is this rhythm that she believes shapes the “movement of images, events and emotions to give rise to ideas”. Pearlman provides an interesting take on the idea of style, and a potentially useful method of illustrating, or even measuring, different stylistic choices.
In this chapter, Pearlman defines ‘editing style’ as a series of choices that sit between two spectrums; the first spectrum being montage and decoupage, and the second being collision and linkage. He highlights the fact that whilst montage and collision are generally considered to go hand in hand, this is not necessarily the case, and the same goes with decoupage and linkage. There are multiple case studies that Pearlman uses to highlight how these two spectrums work together to allow an editor to control a sequence’s time, space and energy.
Pearlman evaluates both spectrums individually, providing a detailed analysis of montage, decoupage, collision as both individual constructs and as a collective. The case studies demonstrate how the the two spectrums can work together to achieve completely unique outcomes, utilising editing techniques such as dissolves and ellipses to create different meanings in time, energy and space. Pearlman further explains that the relationship between elements such as lighting, camera angles and camera movement help create different rhythms in certain sequences.
This chapter is particularly useful because it explains how these different concepts can work together to shape how the time, energy and movement of a film are perceived by the audience. Whilst it doesn’t explicitly talk about the construction of the shot, it does detail how important the cutting of said shots are. Pearlman details how ‘style’ is a set of choices, and that these choices sit within a range from montage to decoupage and from collision to linkage, and the way in which a sequence ‘feels’ is completely up to the way in which the editor links the two spectrums. The shots can be edited in a variety of ways to express a different meaning. This is useful when wanting to control the time, energy and movement of a sequence or film.
Pearlman’s chapter on style introduces her perspective on how editing styles can be categorised along 2 spectrums. On one axis, montage and decoupage sit on opposite ends, on the other, collision and linkage. For the purpose of her analysis, she defines these terms in a slightly different manner to how they may usually be understood. Montage is described as being the assembly of material unrelated in time and space whereas decoupage is the separating of a scene that is continuous. Collision is regarded as difference in the visual or symbolic qualities between shots, contrasting linkage which is the “smooth” transition between. She offers the two spectrums as a way of bringing “common terms of reference” for creatives to discuss editing style, and the range of possibilities in editing. Pearlman argues that there are ways for seemingly contradicting combinations, such as montage-linkage and decoupage-collision. For the former, she uses a film trailer as an example of montage-linkage, and the famous murder scene in Psycho for decoupage-collision.
Personally, I found Pearlman’s writing particularly insightful in providing ways to think about editing. Her decoupage-collision combination is especially interesting, and also connects to some of McCloud’s ideas in Understanding Comics.