Just to make a slight distinction, Eisenstein's intellectual montage-- a
sorta mysticalized Marxist aesthetic--is, ideally, not so much a A + B = C
situation as Dan (the Man) Shaw pointed out but perhaps we could say it's
more like 1 + 1 = 3 (like Deleuze and Guattari's "joy" or
Spinoza's "production of affect"). So pertinent to van (the man) der
Walt's original request, I offer up for contestation and/or food for
thought a few examples:
Errol Morris' more recent documentaries-- especially Fast, Cheap, & Out of
Control-- use montage to add resonance to the interviews. Of course, much
of Morris' use of montage would fall flat without his clever overlapping
sound.
I'd say the shower scene in Psycho is applicable since Hitchcock shows
nothing that in and of itself would be all that terrifying, but by quickly
editing disparate but related images, he creates in Janet Leigh, the
subject (in the Foucauldian sense) so that the viewer thinks "Oh shit! I
just got murked."
Jean Vigo's A propos de Nice, Dovzhenko's Earth, Hour of the Furnaces, and
Chris Marker's Sans Soleil also come to mind.
Plus, Orson Welles' editing style in Lady from Shanghai and F is for Fake
may not constitute as intellectual montage but the effect is pretty
similar.
*
*
Film-Philosophy Email Discussion Salon.
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
For help email: [log in to unmask], not the salon.
**
|