Contents

Foreword by Francis Coppola ix

. Preface to the Second Edition xi
Preface xiii
Cuts and Shadow Cuts 1
Why Do Cuts Work? 5
"Cut Out the Bad Bits" 10
Most with the Least 15
The Rule of Six 17
Misdirection 21
Seeing Around the Edge of the Frame 23
Dreaming in Pairs 26
Team Work: Multiple Editors 29
The Decisive Moment 32
Methods and Machines: Marble and Clay 43
Test Screenings: Referred Pain 52
Don't Worry, It's Only a Movie 57
Dragnet 64
A Galaxy of Winking Dots 70
Afterword:
Digital Film Editing:
Past, Present, and Imagined Future 73
16 IN THE BLINK OF AN EYE

because it had more cuts in it. Frequently, it takes

more work and discernment to decide where not to
cut--don't feel you have to cut just because you are
being paid to. You are being paid to make decisions,
and as far as whether to cut or not, the editor is actu-
ally making twenty-four decisions a second: "No. No.
The Rule of Six
No. No. No. No. No. No. No. No. Yes!"
An overactive editor, who changes shots too fre-
quently, is like a tour guide who can't stop pointing
things out: "And up there we have the Sistine Ceiling,
The first thing discussed in film-school editing
and over here we have the Mona Lisa, and, by the
I classes is what I'm going to call three-dimensional
continuity: In shot A, a man opens a door, walks half-
way, look at these floor tiles ... " If you are on a tour,
way across the room, and then the film cuts to the
you do want the guide to point things out for you, of
next shot, B, picking him up at that same halfway
course, but some of the time you just want to walk
point and continuing with him the rest of the way
around and see what you see. If the guide-that is to
across the room, where he sits down at his desk, or
say, the editor--doesn't have the confidence to let
something.
people themselves occasionally choose what they want
to look at, or to leave things to their imagination, then For many years, particularly in the early years of
he is pursuing a goal (complete control) that in the sound film, that was the rule. You struggled to pre-
end is self-defeating. People will eventually feel con- serve continuity of three-dimensional space, and it
strained and then resentful from the constant pres- was seen as a failure of rigor or skill to violate it. 9
sure of his hand on the backs of their necks. Jumping people around in space was just not done,
except, perhaps, in extreme circumstances-fights or
Well, if what I'm saying is to do more with less,
earthquakes-where there was a lot of violent action
then is there any way to say how much less? Is it
going on.
possible to take this right to its absurd logical conclu-
sion and say, "Don't cut at all?" Now we've come back I actually place this three-dimensional continuity
to our first problem: Film is cut for practical reasons at the bottom of a list of six criteria for what makes a
and film is cut because cutting-that sudden disrup-
9 The problem with this thinking can be seen in any multi-camera
tion of reality-can be an effective tool in itself. So, if situation-comedy on television. Because the cameras are filming si-
the goal is as few cuts as possible, when you have to multaneously, the actors are necessarily always "correct" as far as their
make a cut, what is it that makes it a good one? spatial continuity and relation to each other is concerned, but that
absolutely does not prevent bad cuts from being made all the time.

17
18 IN THE BLINK OF AN EYE THE RULE OF SIX 19

good cut. At the top of the list is Emotion, the thing make a cut, sacrifice your way up, item by item, from
you come to last, if at all, at film school largely be- the bottom.
cause it's the hardest thing to define and deal with. For instance, if you are considering a range of
How do you want the audience to feel? If they are feel- possible edits for a particular moment in the film, and
ing what you want them to feel all the way through you find that there is one cut that gives the right
the film, you've done about as much as you can ever emotion and moves the story forward, and is rhyth-
do. What they finally remember is not the editing, not mically satisfying, and respects eye-trace and planar-
the camerawork, not the performances, not even the ity, but it fails to preserve the continuity of three-di-
story-it's how they felt. mensional space, then, by all means, that is the cut
An ideal cut (for me) is the one that satisfies all you should make. If none of the other edits has the
the following six criteria at once: 1) it is true to the right emotion, then sacrificing spatial continuity is well
emotion of the moment; 2) it advances the story; 3) it worth it.
occurs at a moment that is rhythmically interesting The values I put after each item are slightly tongue-
and "right"; 4) it acknowledges what you might call in-cheek, but not completely: Notice that the top two
"eye-trace"-the concern with the location and move- on the list (emotion and story) are worth far more
ment of the audience's focus of interest within the than the bottom four (rhythm, eye-trace, planarity, spa-
frame; 5) it respects "planarity"-the grammar of three tial continuity), and when you come right down to it,
dimensions transposed by photography to two (the under most circumstances, the top of the list-emo-
questions of stage-line, etc.); 6) and it respects the tion-is worth more than all five of the things under-
three-dimensional continuity of the actual space neath it.
(where people are in the room and in relation to one
And, in fact, there is a practical side to this, which
another).
is that if the emotion is right and the story is advanced
1) Emotion 51 % in a unique, interesting way, in the right rhythm, the
2) Story 23% audience will tend to be unaware of (or unconcerned
3) Rhythm 10% about) editorial problems with lower-order items like
4) Eye-trace 7% eye-trace, stage-line, spatial continuity, etc. The gen-
5) Two-dimensional plane of screen 5% eral principle seems to be that satisfying the criteria
6) Three-dimensional space of action 4% of items higher on the list tends to obscure problems
with items lower on the list, but not vice-versa: For
Emotion, at the top of the list, is the thing that instance, getting Number 4 (eye-trace) working prop-
you should try to preserve at all costs. If you find erly will minimize a problem with Number 5 (stage-
you have to sacrifice certain of those six things to line), whereas if Number 5 (stage-line) is correct but
20 IN THE BLINK OF AN EYE

Number 4 (eye-trace) is not taken into consideration,

the cut will be unsuccessful.
Now, in practice, you will find that those top three
things on the list--emotion, story, rhythm-are ex-
tremely tightly connected. The forces that bind them
together are like the bonds between the protons and
Misdirection
neutrons in the nucleus of the atom. Those are, by
far, the tightest bonds, and the forces connecting the
lower three grow progressively weaker as you go
down the list.
Most of the time you will be able to satisfy all
six criteria: the three-dimensional space and the two-
U nderlying these considerations is the central pre-
occupation of a film editor, which should be to
put himself/herself in place of the audience. What is
dimensional plane of the screen and the eye-trace,
the audience going to be thinking at any particular
and the rhythm and story and emotion will all fall
moment? Where are they going to be looking? What
into place. And, of course, you should always aim
do you want them to think about? What do they need
for this, if possible-never accept less when more is
to think about? And, of course, what do you want
available to you.
them to feel? If you keep this in mind (and it's the
What I'm suggesting is a list of priorities. If you preoccupation of every magician), then you are a kind
have to give up something, don't ever give up emo- of magician. Not in the supernatural sense, just an
tion before story. Don't give up story before rhythm, everyday, working magician.
don't give up rhythm before eye-trace, don't give up
Houdini's job was to create a sense of wonder,
eye-trace before planarity, and don't give up planar-
and to do that he didn't want you to look here (to the
ity before spatial continuity.
right) because that's where he was undOing his chains,
so he found a way to make you look there (to the
left). He was "misdirecting" you, as magicians say. He
was doing something that would cause ninety-nine
percent of you to look over here when he wanted
you to. And an editor can do that and does do that-
and should do that.
Sometimes, though, you can get caught up in the
details and lose track of the overview. When that hap-

21