Speed

Things that filmmakers think will speed up their films, but in fact often slow them down:
1) Lots of narrative strands. Yes, you can move back and forth between them, ensuring a rapid turnover of scenes and a variety of settings and characters. But the effect may be that each story tends to develop VERY SLOWLY, since it only has a short episode of screen time in which to progress. This will become obvious over time. See: HEROES. Unless it becomes obvious AT ONCE. See: ST TRINIANS.
2) Snazzy wipes and other fancy transitions. I used to say that wipes are a sure sign of a film in trouble. Come to think of it, I still do. They are. Admittedly, THE SEVEN SAMURAI and RASHOMON are masterpieces, and Kurosawa in those days used wipes quite a lot. And they don’t hurt those films by any means. But I bet everybody heaved a sigh of relief when he grew out of them.
Instead of wipes, I recommend the use of Intertitles, reading “The makers regret that they were unable to achieve a lively and interesting effect when they shot the film, so here is a diversionary tactic we hope will satisfy.”
Even when the film is “nae bad”, as we say here, wipes generally betray a loss of confidence in the cutting room. Tony Richardson was convinced TOM JONES was a stinker, so he panicked and speckled the film with slightly annoying optical wipes, freeze-frames and flip-flops. To the dessicated shade of Mr. Richardson I wag a finger and say what I say to students when they dangle a script and ask, ‘How do I make it interesting?’ ‘Let’s assume,’ I respond, ‘that it’s ALREADY interesting (because if not, you are stuffed), and instead ask, “How do I bring out its interesting qualities?”‘ Again, Richardson doesn’t ruin TOM JONES, but the techniques he brought to the otiginal filming were much more effective than the optical house malarkey inflicted after the fact.

3) Snappy montages. The Hollywood hack’s chance to show off what songs he can afford. But montages slacken dramatic tension, so though you can whiz through plot developments or show our happy and affluent couple getting to know each other without having to bother with any tiresome WRITING, you allow the audience to drift off into their own little reveries (or to the concession stand) and it will Take Time to get them back.
(A Very Honourable Exception: the turning pages of the scrapbook in THE LIFE AND DEATH OF COLONEL BLIMP, which achieve devastating emotional impact with sublime economy of means.)

This isn’t intended as a list of Thou Shalt Nots. All of the above devices are legitimate. It’s just that they have often been often used to produce an effect of speed and zip which is by no means intrinsic to their nature.
February 13, 2008 at 6:39 pm
My favorite montage sequence is in the Thatcher section of Citizen Kane, featuring the great George Coulouris. It zips thorugh Kane’s yellow journalism triumpsh as Thatcher fumes and fulminates, covering all manner of material at the same time.
February 13, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Yes, it sets up the Thatcher conflict beautifully and leads to the reveal of the young Welles at the end, produced from behind Thatcher’s last copy of The Inquirer like a rabbit from a hat. Wit is a tremendous help in turning a montage from dull prose to beautiful poetry.
I forgot to say that the Blimp scrapbook montage seques into the animal heads appearing on walls montage, which also uses humour, and shows how Clive Wynn-Candy has moved from married life (social functions recorded in scrapbooks) to a single existence (shooting things).
February 13, 2008 at 10:07 pm
now I’d like you to talk about VOICEOVER ! I had to watch Perfume this past weekend - mine hostess had got it from Love film - struck me as a witha not very good script plastering all the holes with john hurt on the soundtrack
February 13, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Is true. Perfume is Perposterous.
BUT I’m not against VO per se, and there’s a battle to be had with all the screenwriting books that say Thou Shalt Not. Sunset Boulevard, Goodfellas, Jules Et Jim, Detour, Taxi Driver… it’s a question of HOW and WHEN.
February 13, 2008 at 10:51 pm
Maguerite Duras takes “voice over” into an entirely new cinematic realm with India Song, Son nom de Venise dans Calcutta desert, Le Naivre Night, Agathe, L’Homme Atlantique, and Aurelia Steiner
February 13, 2008 at 11:48 pm
after cinema euphoria is finished, can we nominate out favourite things about perfume?
mine is dustin hoffman playing a clockwork buffoon
February 14, 2008 at 12:53 am
The orgy at the execution had me throwing stuff at the screen (I was at home at the time).
Duras is quite something. Have only seen India Song of her self-directed works, plus Hiroshima and 10.30pm Summer, which I just can’t get out of my head.
February 14, 2008 at 8:17 am
I’ll trade you the excellent NATHALIE GRANGER for INDIA SONG?
February 14, 2008 at 8:33 am
I think you’re forgetting something quite important with your observations and that is: “Even Rocky had a montage.” Take that into consideration.
February 14, 2008 at 9:59 am
The Rocky montage is interesting only because of the music. They got lucky. Also, the last shot is in reverse because they suddenly realised pulling out to the city was better than zooming in to Rocky.
I just looked — don’t seem to have India Song. And yet, I’m sure I DO. Will get back to you on that. Keen to see Nat G.
February 14, 2008 at 10:22 am
Either you were playing on my TEAM AMERICA sarcasm or disturbingly offering a sincere response (I personally loathe ROCKY; why would I give a shit about a grown man who runs to the top of some stairs and jumps for joy like a retarded child just been given enough pocket money to buy a video game, I’m GLAD he lost at the end, though I’d have preferred the Dolph Lundgren vs Carl Weather’s style ending of the fourth… in the first).
Ooo! Received the brand new remastered EL CID yesterday (a “Deluxe Edition” two-disc set) and I hear that the same company are releasing THE FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE in a similar package… Finally!!
February 14, 2008 at 10:59 am
That’s good news re the Manns (Menn?)
I found India Song. It’s the not-very-good BBC4 broadcast, but you’re welcome to a copy. Let me send you some stuff first, I owe you lots.
February 14, 2008 at 6:01 pm
i don’t think rocky is embarrassing
ditto retarded children and video games
February 14, 2008 at 6:21 pm
William Goldman speaks very highly of the Rocky script. And Stallone seems to have put a bit of effort into the latest sequel.
If it wasn’t for all the sequels in between it might be regarded as a classic of gritty 70s cinema rather than a piece of pop culture (ie crap). John Avildsen’s previous film, Joe, stars Peter Boyle and has quite a high reputation.
But not really my kind of thing. Interesting that it shares a producer with Raging Bull though.
The composer tells a story about how the theme tune evolved — he composed a bit for the montage, then they made it longer so he had to write more. They kept extending it and he kept elongating the music and each bit he added made it more triumphal, and thus we have the Rocky theme.