"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.
Due: Monday, December 10 before class (ON TIME)
Eisenstein's theory is different from that of his fellow film makers during that time period. He uses juxtaposition of shots and lighting, camera angle, etc within the shots to create meaning. While his colleagues used a smoother linkage of shots to create meaning. The discontinuity in Battleship Potemkin, while meant to agitate the viewer, helps portray the reality of the time period. Discontinuity editing helps create a sense of chaos, and Russia was in a state of chaos during that time period. It gives the film a stronger, more accurate verisimilitude. Some felt that the film was set up almost like a documentary, but montage editing was used to ensure that the 5 act film made sense and that the audience wouldn't loose touch with the narrative.
ReplyDeleteFor example, in the long scene where the soldiers are on the steps and killing the innocent people, Eisenstein uses discontinuity to create a wild sense of chaos, but also uses montage editing to ensure that the viewers know whats happening. The length of the shots are varied, along with the angle, lighting, etc. But Eisenstein uses some shots that could be perceived as point of view shots, its really up to the viewer to decide. This variety and ability for the viewer to almost "build their own narrative" is intriguing to many and lets the audience make sense of the film in their own heads, based on how they perceive it.
One movie that uses a theory similar to Eisenstein is Run Lola Run. This film uses discontinuity to portray meaning and themes to the viewers, but also uses montage editing to compress and expand time. The movie is supposed to take place over a 20 minute time period, but the shots make it so the actual length of the film is 81 minutes. Depending on the lighting and camera position/angles, this montage editing mixed with discontinuity can show more to the viewer than if the film was one long shot that lasted only 20 minutes.
According to the above quote, Einstein's theory of montage is based off of the Marxist dialectic, which is basically dialogue between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject, who wish to establish the truth of the matter by dialogue, with reasoned arguments. In terms of shots, this could be interpreted as a series of shots holding conflicting meanings and points of views, that intend to make a point by conflicting with one another. It is easy to see how this works in cinema, especially in films with lots of discontinuity, where two juxtaposing shots are able to create unique meaning. While most of his peers stuck with traditional smooth transitions between shots and actions, Einstein was an experimentalist, and composed lots of elements within the frame, including angle, lighting, and composition of subjects, to portray a more uneasy feeling.
ReplyDeleteThe reason that Einstein's theory of montage works is because the constant discontinuity and cuts between shots are meant to throw the viewer off and excitement. This technique creates a sense of chaos and disorderly conflict within a film, which can be used to enhance a more dramatic scene rather than a more relaxed one. For example, in Battleship Potemkin, the stairs sequence had tons of cuts from random positions inside of the event. The audience could not tell the relative position of most things inside of the sequence, which was intended, in order to utilize the montage theory at it's best and to add discontinuity to a chaotic part in the movie. The juxtaposition of shots plays a key role in this.
A film that I have seen that uses discontinuity editing and seems somewhat influenced by Einstein's theory is none other than "Run Lola Run" directed by Tom Tykwer. "Run Lola Run" uses quick cutting shots all throughout intense parts, most notably the beginning, where the two main characters, Lola and Manni, were in a panic as they were conversing on the phone. The seemingly skipped actions in between shots speeds up time periods and emphasizes urgency in a particular scene. Also, while Lola is running through the streets to get the Manni, the shots were more extended and seemed to resemble a pattern, until she ran into a problem, therefore speeding up cuts and multiplying the amount of discontinuity in the scene.
Eisenstein’s theory puts in play different types of shots to help create a deeper meaning while provoking different feelings from the audience. This is very much in contrast to the normal editing of shots that had been and were going on during this time. Others thought he was crazy for experimenting with such an odd way of editing, such as D. W. Griffith. The montage of different camera angles, lighting techniques, and cut away shots used in Battleship Potemkin was not really liked by the viewer, but it did portray the facts and reality of what was going on in Russia – the Bolshevik Revolution.
ReplyDeleteThe film Battleship Potemkin is a very unique movie that uses the very unique style of montage editing. Most of the movie utilizes this style of editing, but one scene in particular is the Odessa Steps scene. In this scene, Eisenstein uses different camera angles and cuts to show the agony and chaos in the scene. The camera would cut to a wide angle shot of the whole crowd and then to the soldiers and then to a close up of random people hiding and then another wide angle. Sometimes, if you look closely, they use the same wide angle shot a couple of times just to show some discontinuity. One part in that scene that got to me in particular was the scene part where the baby was falling down the steps. Before the carriage made it to the bottom, the camera showed a shot of a woman, then of the carriage hitting the bottom and about to tip over, then a soldier swinging, then the woman with a bloody face. This discontinuity leaves the viewer stupefied about whether the soldier was hitting the woman or the baby, but still does not take away from the overall meaning of the scene. There is still chaos.
One movie that I have watched that displayed some influence from Eisenstein’s film was Run Lola Run. This film has a lot of discontinuity, whether it is lighting, subject movement, or cuts between shots. The discontinuity is used to expand the time. All of the action that occurs in each part is going on for 20 minutes, but so much is going on. The shots become shorter and shorter because the editor has to fit as much into the part as he/she can. Also, the shots became shorter and shorter as the scene became more and more frantic and Lola and Donnie became worried that they wouldn’t get the money in time. There were jump cuts and flashbacks that had almost no relevance to the storyline, but had helped the portrayal of the overall meaning of no one can tell fate.
Eisenstein's editing sequence of the montage is able to create meaning between juxtaposed shots. These juxtaposed shots are able to create dicontinuity in the editing. Esienstein's theory of montage editing does work and can be used in several different meanings with discontinuity editing. An example of this experimental editing can be found in the film "Battleship Potemkin" during the scenes of the workers on Potemkin when they revolt, and during the odessa step sequence.
ReplyDeleteEisenstein used discontinuity tin order to create several different effects within the viewer. There is one scene where the workers on the ships are getting ready to revolt because they cant take their bosses anymore. so they regused to eat the bad meat that had worms in it, and they got together and revolted against their bosses. However there are also several instances of discontinuity in this scene that brings dome confusion, meaning, and gives emfasis.on what is in the frame to the viewer. In several instances, disconttinuity editing is used in this scene to add confusion to the viewer but also to add meaning. Earlier in the sceme we see a close up of the worms in the meat that the health inspector guy just shrugs off as not harmful, just to brush them off. These worms can come to symbplize a reason for the workers rebelling against the leaders on the ship. So later in the scene we see some discontinuity creating meaning and confusion using the shot of the worms at a close up. We start at a long shot of the workers looking at the bosses in a POV shot, and then we cut jaringly to a.shot of the worms. At first we are confused because of the noticiable shift in the content in the frame, but then we create meaning between the two shots. We can now associate the worms and the leaders as being similar because if this cut between the two things with the koleshuv effect. We can now interpret that the leaders are just as low.as the worms, but also that they are a reason for them revolting in the first place, since they did the horrible things anyway like the meat infested.worms.Another example of discontinuity in this scene is the repeated actions of the workers. One shot shows the worker saluting to the leader, but then we edit in an interesting way. We see that worker salute three seperate times, all from slightly different angles and distances from the camera. This draws attention to the editing, thus being discontinuity, but what does it mean? It creates emphasis on the content of the kinesis of the shot. We know.that this ia important because it was shown several times. Possibly to show the commitment of the crew in contrast to when the crew revolts and takes over the ship not too much later.So discontinuity can be used in that way, but another meaning and use can be shown in the Odessa step sequence.
During the Odessa step sequence, discontinuity is used to create confusion and panic.I. the viewer that the characters are feeling. We see the people on land rejocing for the victories of the rebels, when the police figures.show up and start shooting randomly at the citizens. This is when the discontinuity begins in this scene. We get several jarring cuts between people running and screaming, to a bunch of people hiding behind a wall, to shots of tbd enforcers shooting effectively but maliciously at the people running in panic. The dicontinuity comes from putting together of shots that don't really explain too much about the content of the shot. Like when we have a close up the baby about to tip out of the basket, then we cut to a person quickly bashing down with a club and then we can assume that he has struck the baby.
Butthen we cut to a close up of a person's face that is bleeding with their glasses broken. So did he hit her? Or the baby? They have the brutality of hitting a baby or the person, but the discontinuity creates confusion sobwe are unsure. We have to decide that for ourselves. This type of editing is used throughiut the whole scene like when we randomly cut to people hiding and running, and we have no explanation of where they are at all in the context of the scene. This creates co fusion which the editor is obviously trying to create in the panic of this scene l.
ReplyDeleteOne movie I have scene that uses discontinuity editing to create confusion uses it by making it seem like the discontinuity was really a misread continuity, in the movie The Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. One scene that uses this greatly is the scene where we first end with the two main characters have met, and we find out they probably are going out now.then we have a cut with no transition that jars us slightly when we cut to a long shot of a house, then we enter the scene with the main character talking to his parents about how she broke up with him. From the content of the scene we are confused but we think that we have jumped far into the futurefrom thatdicintinuity editing, so it seems less confusiong now. But what's even crazier confusing about that instance of discontinuity is that we have actually gone back in time. Withno explanation of wherewith is, what is happening or whereas are in time. So we could easily confuse abiut where we are in time and assume W's arein the future. But really W's are in the past. This kind of discontinuity can easily be comparred to that of Eisenstein's type of editing, where we created emphasis and confused the viewer with it.
Based off of my own observations made on Eisenstein's "Battle of Pokémon", his theory of montage without a doubt, works! The specific style of editing that he used promotes spatial and temporal discontinuity.The editing is supposed to attract attention to itself, and is meant to shock the audience and create a powerful experience.
ReplyDeleteDuring the scene where the people are running down the staircase, there are several shots that are arranged in a manner that seems to be random or do not make sense. But the shots shouldn't be looked at individually as being short and insignificant, but as a whole, because they all have an even greater meaning when combined. When the mother holding her child is shot, her reaction is extended, and is separated by a shot of a completely different part of the staircase. This technique is also used when the mother with the baby carriage is killed. The shot of her falling to the ground is separated by shots of the soldiers walking and crowds of people running. Though it may seen that it has no organization or rhythm, the editing decisions are actually very complex, so that we can emotionally respond to the chaotic scenery in a way that Eisenstein intended.
The experimental film "Man with a Movie Camera", the same style of montage editing is used as a way to strike the emotional response of the audience. The film places shots in sequences that establish relationships between them. There is a scene that shows a man doing magic tricks, then is crossed with shots of children's faces. We do not know exactly if the children are reacting to the magic tricks, or if the shots were filmed in completely different places. But when they are put together, it looks as though they are directly related. The film also contains discontinuity throughout, by jumping from one event to the next without transitions. This makes it hard for the audience to figure out what exactly is going on, even though there is no story.
Einstein’s theory for montage editing was revolutionary at the time he was making movies, and even today well executed discontinuous/montage editing is rare; the discontinuity must have meaning and serve a function. Einstein certainly did have a purpose for his editing choices. The way that shots were cut together, on the surface without a rhyme or reason, actually adds to the meaning. Einstein’s most discontinuous parts- the steps sequence, the initial rebellion on the ship and the final battle- are all composed of many more shots than we would ordinarily expect, playing with the temporal reality of the moment in the film. We see the same action of the mother falling, and the same action of the cannon rising many times from different angles which adds weight and importance to the action.
ReplyDeleteAlso in these three sequences the montage editing creates a feel of chaos. There are a plethora of shots, many that the viewer cannot really place as to if it is a point of view shot or exactly where we are looking. But we realize that those aspects are not really important to understanding the film. This chaotic aspect makes us realize that the people in the scene did not fully comprehend what they were looking at or what was going on either. The fact that these three scenes are edited similarly, with short, montage shots and quick cuts, also makes for continuity out of their discontinuity. We can easily tell that they are pivotal scenes because we can tell that the rhythm of the editing has changed.
In the several "contruct" scenes in The Matrix, Einstein's legacy of discontinuity can be observed. One of the most commonly used editing tools used in these scenes is the match cut and the graphic match cut. We see a point of view shot of something on the tv, then we get an opposite shot of the same scene, only now the characters are in the new location that had been on the tv, but with the furniture set up in the same way. And then as the camera pans out, the scene becomes just a graphic image, then reappears in the next shot as another image on the tv screen and they are back in the white contruct. The glasses that Laurnece Fishburne's character wears are another way they can play with the editing. We see a shot of Keanu Reeves, then we continue to see his reaction, from another perspective from the reflection in the glasses of Fishburne. This editing plays with the viewer's senses and sense of reality, one of the primary goals of this film.
DeleteAs everyone knows in the film business, Battleship Potemkin stands out because of Eisenstein’s need for discontinuity in order to achieve his own film theory. Not only just in Eisenstein's film but in most russian movies, since they were known for discontinuity. In my opinion, Eisenstein's method works. Backing it up with evidence, in the last scene of Battleship Potemkin, there were many episodes of discontinuity to increase the feeling that Eisenstein wanted the viewers to feel.
ReplyDeleteIn the last scene, after the sailors get off the stairs, the shots kept on switching back to the control center where it was crowded and then back to, then staying shots of the latter/ staircase being collapsed. It seemed unnecessary but in one of these shots, the camera is not focusing on the stairs, but on the water behind it. What could this be for? Well this proves to be the introduction shot for two other discontinued shots of water. I mean discontinued because the next shot of water has an awkward wave pattern that could attract anyone's attention. Another aspect i have seen is the timing of the shots. Some cutaway faster than the viewer thinks, which brings a sense of uneasiness, while others take too long to escape from in the viewers mind. Before the long scene of the machines, there are fast cut aways maybe in order to even out what is about to come where the shots of the machines are elongated and are just there to prove the captains command(full steam ahead). Added into the machine mix are shots of the water. I believe that this is to prove the effect of the machines working faster and faster since because of the last command. Also added into the combination are the shots of rising black steam to also prove that the machines are working. There is a little discontinued shot with the steam. This shot is of the trail of steam behind the ship in which there has been no shot behind the scene before. Even though this is a discontinued shot, the meaning is understandable and that meaning is to show how far the ship has traveled.
A film that is also affected by Eisenstein's working theory of discontinuity and montage editing is Man with a Movie Camera. Yes this film is an experiment, but discontinuity is used throughout the experiment to see how the viewers react while obviously involving montage editing since different scenes collapsed together usually have nothing to do with each otherr
After examining Eisenstein's Battleship Potemkin (and thinking about it in relation to other film's we've watched and examined), I believe that Eisenstein's theory of discontinuity and montage work. First, through Battleship Potemkin, Eistenstein was trying to demonstrate the feeling of rebellion and disarray. The film starts off in a more continuous fashion, as the shots seem to make sense. But as the soldiers and sailors realize the corruption that is taking place and the unfair treatment that they have received, the shots become more discontinuous and the editing becomes less and less "structured" and more seemingly "random." This creates almost a feeling of tension within the audience itself. By simply viewing an action we can relate to the scene as loosely as possible, but this editing makes it almost as if we're there with them experiencing the same terror and trauma that they are.
ReplyDeleteThe most compelling scenes in the movie were arguably shot on stairs, the first of which occurring on the ship right after the soldiers who were about to be shot at escape from under the tarp and run amuck. As one of the soldiers runs down the "wrong" staircase, we see an old man who we've never seen before, at an angle. As the soldier gets chased, the old man's crucifix falls and lands on an angle into the ground like a spear. Due to this symbol, we can argue that the old man is a symbol of god himself and the cross falling and sticking into the ground is a symbol of the loss of religion and therefore morals. This same sort of idea is brought out in the other stair scene where a mother pleads to the soldiers to spare her son because he was wounded, but the soldiers have no pity. During this scene we cut back and forth from the viewpoints of different people until we see a baby. This baby eventually falls down the stairs and we watch it descend we cut to the views of various people who offer their reactions to us, making it all the more horror-filled.
A film that was most likely based on Eisenstein's theory was Run Lola Run. The editing in Run Lola Run was visibly based on the editing Eisenstein uses in Battleship Potemkin, especially through viewpoints and storylines. For example, for a select five people we encounter during each story, we see a different future for them through pictures. This adds discontinuity but also allows us to experience the shift in time and how one miniscule action can change the entire future of not just the person involved, but everybody he/she encounters.
Eisenstein’s theory of montage can be explained as a combination of different shots that can on their own mean one thing, but when put together, make a new meaning to the separate shots that make up the montage. He thought the idea of jarring or agitating his audience was actually a good thing, and that it added deeper levels of meaning to films he created. He thought adding discontinuity was interesting and perhaps a fantastic way of further getting the meaning of the scene across to the viewer. Some people said he was crazy to think this, said that it wouldn’t work. That audiences would not enjoy being jarred or agitated while watching a film and that it would make them never want to see that movie again. That discontinuity would never be a good way to help convey meaning in any scene or film. They were obviously wrong, as Eisenstein’s films are still influencing filmmakers even in our era, so many years after his time.
ReplyDeleteEisenstein’s theory works by taking two different shots of two different objects or actions that are occurring in the world of the film and smashing them together with no explanation of how these two shots are related. This causes the viewer to get an uneasy feeling about what they are watching. This helps convey the chaotic way of the scene to the viewer so the viewer understands how confused the people in the film are. It essentially helps put the audience in the characters shoes. By using Eisenstein’s theory of montage, it forces the viewer to pay attention to the transitions, confusing them at times, and also in my opinion forcing them to pretend they are in the world of the film with the other characters amongst the chaos of the discontinuity.
A film that uses this theory that I have seen is Team America: World Police. This is a great film with a great example of what a montage is. While performing a montage, the background music is a song about what it means to have a montage. It is the best example of a montage I have seen, as well as a hilarious one. This montage is about a man named Gary Johnson who needed to become a complete solider in a short amount of time. So Spottswoode, the leader, called for a montage to speed up the process. What followed were shots of Gary lifting weights, running on a treadmill, and shooting but horribly missing his target. As the montage went on, he got progressively better until at the end he hits the target perfectly while shooting. Smashing all of these shots together is an example of Eisenstein’s theory of montage in a modern day movie.
Eisenstein says that juxtaposing two shots creates a third meaning that neither shot alone can convey. This is similar to Kuleshovs Experiment in the sense that both of them try to use editing to convey the meaning rather than title boards. Eisenstein’s theory works relatively (haha) when talking of two shots put together so that the transfer of shots is noticed enough to that the audience knows to put them together to crest that third meaning, but not so evident to throw the audience off the trail so to speak. If the two shots are too discontinuous the audience will not know how to connect the two shots and the meaning won't be picked up on. Also if two shots are too similar, the audience may not notice a difference between the two and may never even attempt at finding the third meaning. Or that meaning may be too subtle for them to pick up on.
ReplyDeleteSome aspects of Eisenstein’s theory require shot angles to be significant as well as the length of the takes and the implied distance from the camera. All these are important to imply how the subject of each shot affects the others. If there are two shots and one is a low angled shot then the one with the low angled shot is seen as the one with power over the other because he is standing 'over' the camera.
A film i have seen that seems to be influenced by Eisenstein’s theory is Run Lola Run. Whenever Lola is screaming, which apparently happens more than you’d think, it shows Lola screaming, and then shows an object, typically made of glass, explode from the sound vibrations. This is the Kuleshov effect and Eisenstein’s theory, because i don't really see a difference between the two. Another movie that seems to be influenced by Eisenstein’s theory would be nearly any movie with a battle scene. In these battle scenes, lets use Lord of the Rings return of the king for instance, when Eowyn slays the witch king. Before Theoden is trapped and injured by the witch king all the shots have short takes and are typically mid-close ups of soldiers fighting to emphasize the chaos. Whenever an archer looses an arrow, it shows the carnage in a separate shot; or half the time when a soldier or an orc lands a killing blow, it shows the beginning of the action, and then the result of it. Another example is in the animated Disney movie Robin Hood. When Robin and a bunny child character both shoot arrows, it shows a rat get pinned up against a post by a single arrow, and then the bunny child jumps up in excitement and glee. This implies that it was the bunny who made the shot, when it was obviously Robin Hood.
Jack--I LOVE your examples in the last paragraph!
DeleteEinstein's theory seems to hold the same idea as the kuleshov effect, which holds the idea that two frames placed side by side, one showing an action and the next showing a result would allow the viewer to connect the before and after, eliminating the need to have the middle action filmed. As well as saving the film maker's time, resources, and energy, this is also an effective method when considering the representation of time, and the fact that most films' time spans greatly extend the literal time of the movie's duration. This can be used discontinuously with great effect, as a viewer has to pay particular attention to the shots involved in the montage, and as such the jarring effect produced by discontinuity can accent actions and caused an increased engagement in said viewer.
ReplyDeleteIn this film, Einstein's idea of the montage is sued very effectively, in the case of the Odessa steps (which would be the obvious choice to explore in this film), in particular the ending segment. We watch the soldiers march down the Odessa steps and raise their rifles, which go off. The camera cuts to the face of a woman crying out in pain, which implies that she has been shot by the rifles of the previous shot. The woman claws at her abdomen, and the camera cuts back to the guns, then again to the woman's abdomen, and we can infer that the damage done to her abdomen is a result of the shot fired earlier. The woman falls, knocking her baby, in carriage, down the stairs. We then cut back and forth between the carriage and horrified on lookers who are screaming, and we make the connection that they are yelling out in disgust as to what is transpiring. Also, we watch the wheels of the carriage bump down a series of stairs, then a close up of the baby bouncing in the crib, implying that the baby is indeed in the carriage and careening down the stairs. Finally, the baby reaches the bottom of the stairs,we see an angry man raise a sword, then the baby, then the man brings his sword down, and blood spurts onto an onlooker, implying that the baby was butchered.
"Run Lola Run" is rife with discontinuity. When Lola first finds out about Manni's dilemma, she is at a loss for what to do, and we get a discontinuity moment when we see her flicker between a number of different poses without actually moving, causing a weird jerking motion that draws the viewer's attention. Also, when Lola gets shot, the gun is showed being fired, then we see Lola shudder from the impact of the bullet and imply that she has been shot by the bullet. Similarly to what I stated before, Lola uses discontinuity to manipulate the flow of this time, but instead of making a long amount of time move more rapidly, this movie makes a 20 minute time period span the length of a full movie, showing another use of discontinuity.
I know it's 1:37, but I've had a splitting headache for hours, and it's just now lightened up enough to get some work done. I've finished almost all of my M screening sheet, so I''ll turn that in early tmm, and I'll do movie camera tmm afternoon. love you ms holden ^__^
Delete