"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.
Here is a link to the film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TgWoSHUn8c
Eisenstien's theory states that by slating images together with each other, they can effect the meaning of each other and the film, to the extent of creating meaning absent from either of the shots alone. This is put into practice during Act IV, The Odessa Steps, twice. The first is when a lady is on the steps and realizes that her boy has been shot and is dead. The effect of the film switching back and forth between a horrified woman and a child fallen (shot) and stepped on. Without sound, the film still does an extremely good job of rising the tension and horror of the scene by using montage.The second time is when another woman dies, and her carriage, for all to see, rolls down the stairs, baby and all. The same effect is impressively achieved here, but even more so as it is a consecutive use of the technique.
ReplyDeleteOne movie where this technique seems prominent is in Be Cool, where there is a scene when two friends are out to dinner and there is a shooting that takes one of them down. The montage is of the gunman, the victim, and of the protagonist. It serves to show the later contrast between the protagonist and the gunman, as the hero reacts calmly and cool, even reacting nonchalantly to a gun after keeping it's bullet count, as opposed to the villain, who's unorganized and acting on impulse.
Eisenstein's theory of montage states that the arrangement of shots creates meaning beyond that created by individual shots. Eisenstein is well known for his use of montage throughout his film career. One of Eisenstein's most well-known uses of montage was in Battleship Potemkin (1925). This was when Eisenstein cut from the bombing of Odessa to a statue of a sleeping lion, to a statue of an awaken lion, to a statue of a risen lion. Eisenstein used montage to compare the rising lion to the people of Russia rising against oppression. Eisenstein’s Marxist filmmaking almost always contained strong themes of revolution.
ReplyDeleteEisenstein’s theory is quite effective. In fact, just about all of Eisenstein’s films rely almost entirely on montage. Eisenstein’s montage theory has had a large influence on film to this day. The Kuleshov effect even relies on the principles of the montage theory. Both the montage theory and the Kuleshov effect prove that the synthesis of images can create different meanings depending on how the images are arranged.
Citizen Kane (1941), one of the most popular films of all time, seems to be influenced by Eisenstein’s use of montage in his films. Welles uses montage to express Kane’s growing disinterest with not only his first wife, Emily, but his old life. Welles does this by showing a series of brief exchanges between the two at breakfast throughout their years together. Watching this scene after seeing Battleship Potemkin, it is clear that Welles drew inspiration from Eisenstein’s use of montage.
Excellent example, Jimmy!
DeleteEinstein's theory of montage most definitely works, especially using Battleship Potemkin as an example. The shots in times of tension are short, well lit and contrasted. This creates the atmosphere of suspense, which supports Einstein's theory. Specifically, in Battleship Potemkin, the famous film sequence where the baby begins to fall down the stairs in its carriage is filled with very intense shots which attract the eye of the viewer by cutting in shots of witnesses' surprised expressions and the position of the camera as it focuses on the baby. Furthermore, Einstein's film method works in the case of Alfred Hitchcock's cinematic masterpiece, Psycho. Hitchcock, being the celebrity and mastermind that he is, most likely purposely incorporated Einstein's theory into his film. He begins using discontinuity editing in the very beginning of the piece and continues with it until the end. For example, following the title sequence, Hitchcock uses a variety of angles to convey the different emotions felt by the characters; it succeeds at creating tension. Based off of these two cinematic works, I believe Einstein's theory of montage is incredibly successful.
ReplyDeleteEisenstein's theory of montage works by combining two conflicting shots with a different meaning, (a thesis and antithesis), to create a whole new meaning, (a synthesis). This pattern continues to drive the film forward. For example, with the Kuleshov Effect, a shot of a man with a blank expression was edited next to various shots such as a bowl of soup or a dead person, and with each different combination of shots, people attributed different meanings.
ReplyDeleteEisenstein’s theory definitely works, and a good example is seen in his film Battleship Potemkin.
In the Odessa Steps sequence, a group of soldiers are attacking a crowd of innocent civilians. Eisenstein effectively cuts between contrasting shots of the soldiers attacking and the civilians fleeing to express the power of the soldiers and helplessness of the civilians during this massacre.
One film that I have seen that uses discontinuity editing is the sci-fi short film From the Future With Love, directed by K-Michel Parandi. Early in the film there is a police advertisement sequence introducing the New York Police Corporation’s coverage plans. Parandi uses an intellectual montage, putting together shots of the police company’s different features and services to have the viewer believe that this police company has the best service plans and coverage in the film.
Sergei Eisenstein's theory of montage was based around the practice of taking conflicting shots, a thesis and its antithesis, each with their own individual meanings, and combining them to synthesize a new meaning within the film. In this, even though the shots aren't inherently related, their proximity with one another will cause their audience to form a relationship between the two that takes on a new meaning unattainable when viewed separately. This school of thought gives a greater power of narrative towards the film's editor, as it is through their composition of shots that these greater meanings can be achieved.
ReplyDeleteEisenstein heavily utilized his theories in his film "Battleship Potemkin", and in this showcases its effectiveness. While "Battleship Potemkin" is essentially a propaganda piece, a microcosm of the actual Bolshevik revolution, Eisenstein was able to use his theories on montage to convey both tone and intention while keeping the overtness of the messages to decent proportion. This is most present in his Odessa Steps sequence, portraying the horrors of the Tsarist regime as soldiers massacre a town of innocent civilians. Landscapes of townsfolk fleeing and dying are intercut with the rigid emotionless march of the Tsar's forces, and close ups of such horrifying images as children being trampled, a baby carriage falling down the long steps and the Tsarist general screaming and slashing his sword on the camera and on the horrified, bloodied civilians. It's a chaotic brutal scene that utilizes montage to its full effect.
If there is only one contemporary director that understands and uses discontinuity editing effectively, it's Edgar Wright. A particular sequence that comes to mind is from his dark comedy "Hot Fuzz". In the sequence, the protagonist is forced to transfer to a quiet country village for being too good of a police officer, and the film follows his moving process through a fast-edited montage intercutting between shots of him on an assortment of trains and cabs, him sitting idly in resignation, and of his phone's reception getting lower and lower. In this, the audience is able to see how far removed the town of Sandford is from the high action of London, how awkward and purposeless the protagonist is outside of his work, and how the forced transfer is affecting him internally-and all in the span of less than 30 seconds.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn the 1920s, Eisenstein developed his own theory on the existing editing technique, known as the Soviet montage theory. Eisenstein's take on it was that there were five different ways to effectively use montage. Montage was the technique where a sequence of relatively short shots were edited together not for the purpose of continuity but in order to use the juxtaposition of the shots to create a new meaning. Eisenstein's take on it was that there were five different ways to effectively utilize montage: metric, rhythmic, tonal, overtonal, and intellectual. Briefly, metric is cutting in accordance to the length of the shot, rhythmic cuts by the tempo of the content in the shot, tonal is the clash of elements (lighting, lines, planes, etc.), overtonal considers all of the above in the overall effect, and intellectual strings several shots together "to create a visual metaphor" (Dunagan).
ReplyDeleteHis theory works effectively because it is compatible to the way the human mind works. In real life, we see bits and pieces of information, akin to the juxtaposing shots in a montage, and must synthesize meaning from our observations. Because of our natural ability to put together information to make a coherent whole, we can understand montages and intuitively grasp the meaning they are trying to convey. For example, in the Steps Sequence, the rhythmic montage of the stiff, calculated marching of the soldiers juxtaposed to the mass of the people running represents the political struggle between the tight control of the czarist regime and the people’s desire to break free of this repression.
One recent example of a film that uses this technique of montage is John Hughes’ Ferris Bueler’s Day Off (1986). During the museum scene, a shot of Cameron standing in front of a painting by Georges Seurat is intercut with a shot of Ferris and Sloane kissing, then another shot of Cam followed by Ferris and Sloane again. The first two are long shots, and the second time around they are medium close-ups, indicating growing importance. This parallel action shows Cam as the odd one out of the trio. The next sequence intercuts between Cam and the Seurat painting, each shot zoomed in a little closer—and the shots decrease in length. What captures Cam’s focus is the little girl in the painting standing by a protective mother, which we recognize from earlier context as the kind of relationship Cam longs for with his parents. As the rhythmic montage speeds up and each subsequent shot is of a greater zoom, the relationship between Cam and the little girl intensifies; in the last extreme close-up, we see the camera has zoomed in so much that the colors can’t be recognized as the girl anymore. Because of the montage, we make the connection between the girl and Cam: “The more you look at him the less you see. There isn't anything there.” –John Hughes, director
Excellent example, Lucy. And nice summation of montage theory.
DeleteEisenstein's Theory of Montage consists of the different arrangements of shots with their own individual meaning sequenced in an order which adds another completely new meaning. This was a style of arrangement unorthodox to what other directors were doing at that time. In Battleship Potemkin, Eisenstein utilizes this technique to create anxiety, horror, and suspense for the viewer. For example, in the scene where many people are running in mass hysteria and in fear of being killed, montage is used. A specific example is when the baby in his carriage begins to fall down some steps. The shots flicker back and forth from the baby making his way down the stairs to the rest of the people running and gathering their kids and loved ones. This montage allows the viewer to question what is going to happen and have them worry in response to the anxiety and suspense being built up.
ReplyDeleteA film that the theory of montage occurs in is Metropolis. According to Walter Benjamin, the film is a work of "pure montage." Langz uses montage to convey dramatic actions. For example, in the scene where the vision of Rotwang and Freder is created, their charge with the seven deadly sins, Maria, and the new Hel is conveyed.
Samiha--excellent example. I wish, though, that you had expanded your description of the scene in Metropolis and added the implied meaning!
DeleteI do believe that Eisenstein's theory of montage definitely does work because it seems to work a lot like the Kuleshov Effect. This is when you take two seemingly irrelevant shots of different things or events happening, edit them together, and create new meaning, that wasn't there before, between those two shots.
ReplyDeleteEisenstein's theory of montage works by using the juxtaposition of different shots and angles to evoke emotion. An example of this in Battleship Potemkin is when the soldiers are at the top of the Odessa Steps shooting at the crowd. The scene mainly consist of two different shots: the shot of the soldiers shooting from the top of the stairs and the shot of the crowd running down the stairs. These two shots together imply that this crowd is running away from the soldiers' line of fire.
An example of Eisenstein's method is in Jason Reitman's "Juno"(2007) when Juno is in the waiting room of an abortion clinic and there are many shots of her face and then a bunch of shots of other people in the waiting room fidgeting with their nails. During that scene, Eisenstein's method was used by showing the two completely different shots next to each other to evoke Juno's nervousness of being in the clinic.
Einstein’s theory of montage is the theory that the arrangement of shots creates meaning other than that of the shots by themselves.Einstein uses this theory while arranging conflicting shots (thesis and antithesis) to stir up a reaction out of the viewer.This juxtaposition creates another layer of meaning to the shots. One that might not have been conveyed without that style of editing.
ReplyDeleteEinstein’s theory definitely works as proven by a study done by adding a shot such as children playing or a dead body after a shot of an emotionless actor and seeing how people interpret the end result. Although separately the two shots would have separate and unrelated meanings together it creates an entirely different narrative. It is also show in modern day film as many filmmakers employ discontinuity editing to create meaning in a scene.
Einstein’s theory of montage was used in a short film I watched recently on youtube. A window was shown with the boy looking through it. The shot is peaceful, with nothing but a medium shot of the boy. Next a shot of what is assumed to be his dad yelling while brandishing a baseball is shown, then back to a shot of the boy and the window, except closer. The two shots were opposites, one peaceful and the other conveying anger. Separately the two shots would have their own meaning or one that is not clear. Together however it creates meaning, of a boy who broke a window and whose dad is angry at him for doing so.
Great example, Sydney! Do you remember the name of the short on youtube?
DeleteThe theory of Montage, originated by Sergei Eisenstein in the early 1920s, is based around the idea of taking two juxtaposing shots, a thesis and antithesis, and combining them to create a new meaning that would not have been present if the two shots were presented separately. The result of the combination of the two shots is called the synthesis. This theory of filmmaking clashed greatly with the practices used by other filmmakers at the time, such as D.W. Griffith. Griffith, and his contemporaries, favored an editing style that served the purpose of preserving continuity within the film. Eisenstein, however, eschewed the concept of continuity editing in favor of creating a stronger, more meaningful narrative. Eisenstein was among the first filmmakers to attempt to use editing, rather than the storyline, to convey the narrative and ideas of the film.
ReplyDeleteI find that Eisenstein’s theory of montage is effective in conveying implied meaning through seemingly discontinuous editing of shots. The film Battleship Potemkin, directed by Eisenstein, uses the theory of Montage to great effect. In the Odessa steps sequence, there are two primary foci of shots: the soldiers, and the common people that were being shot at by the soldiers. The shots of the soldiers, although they vary in the types of shots, all tend to indicate that the soldiers are in a position of power. Shots of the civilians, conversely, imply that they are in a position of weakness. Combining these two elements clearly shows that the soldiers are using unnecessary force on fearful civilians. Eisenstein's theory of montage ultimately creates a bridge between explicit and implicit meaning in a film.
An example of montage in modern film occurs through parallel editing in the 1991 thriller Silence of the Lambs. In the film, there are two events occurring simultaneously in different locations. One event shows protagonist Clarice at the door of murderer Buffalo Bill, the subject of her search. The other event shows the FBI breaking into a house that they believe holds Buffalo Bill, but later find out that it does not. Separately, Clarice alone at Buffalo Bill’s house creates a feeling of suspense and danger, while the FBI breaking into the wrong house indicates incompetence amongst the FBI officers. Together, however, these two events strengthen the implied meaning that was previously present.
Eisenstein’s theory of montage emerged in the mid-1920s as a method of editing that helps to convey meaning between shots. According to his theory, the implied meaning of a scene can be created by the collision of shots with contrasting angles, lighting, or movement. These shots would probably have little meaning if they were taken out of the context of the film and studied individually, but when they are edited together, it can have evoke emotion and have a powerful effect on the viewer. Instead of linking the shots together seamlessly, Eisenstein favored discontinuity editing to join shots. The shifts from one shot to the next are jarring and noticeable to the viewer because of their differences in subject matter, so they can not help but forge a connection between the shots.
ReplyDeleteI think that Eisenstein’s theory of montage can definitely work very well when it is applied to films. Most of his films rely on this theory of editing, most notably the Odessa step sequence in his most famous film, Battleship Potemkin. The scene depicts citizens fleeing down the steps as soldiers march after them. Eisenstein combined shots with contrasting lengths and subjects to create a sense of horror and disarray within the scene. The shots of the soldiers seemed especially cruel when juxtaposed with shots of desperately panicking citizens of Odessa.
A more modern example of montage can be seen in the 1972 film The Godfather. During the famous baptism scene, Coppola cuts between shots of Michael standing in a church to watch the christening of his godson and shots of a series of murders planned by Michael. The sounds of the priest talking and the baby crying carry through all of the shots in the scene, including the ones depicting the murders, which helps the viewer understand the relationship between the shots. If we were to watch a scene that only depicts the baptism, Michael would appear to be an innocent and peaceful character, but the juxtapostion of the murders within the scene emphasizes his descent from the only honest man in his family to the embodiment of crime and corruption.