Blog on Murch's "In the Blink of an Eye"

It’s an honest opening: “the overwhelming majority of an editor’s time is not spent” making cuts; it’s “a vast amount of time” in “plain deliberative thought”—only to arrive at something that (if done well) shouldn’t “even [be] noticed at all” (4).

“You can look at the human and the chimp as different films edited from the same set of dailies” (13); I like this comparison—particularly in association with our final project; for it is exactly the lesson learned: two (or more) editors with the same set of dailies “would make different films out of the same material”—with different sequencing and manipulation that thus results in a different story (13).

Murch is actually a good writer in so far as using figurative language to aid in the understanding of the craft of film editing: “an overactive editor, who changes shots too frequently, is like a tour guide who can’t stop pointing things out” (16); you should only make a cut when you have to, which then leads into the ‘Rule of Six’ as discussed in class.

“If the emotion is right and the story is advanced […] the audience will tend to be unaware of editorial problems” (19); this is definitely accurate. A few months ago—before I had the slightest editorial knowledge, conceptually—I was completely oblivious to the existence of eye-trace, stage-line, spatial continuity, etc. Point being, it’s fitting that Murch values emotion to the extent he does; for the only thing the audience will remember is “how they felt” (18).

The editor’s “virginity” on Page 24 is an interesting concept; “don’t impregnate” yourself with the emotional conditions of shooting. It does make sense; and I guess this is why you don’t go on set anymore, Alex.

The measures of continuity are pain-staking: hairlines, collar flips (33), and the keeping of awareness is important to note; even with the extremely short videos I’ve edited thus far, I’ve experienced this “mental glaze” of letting dailies “roll over” me (41).

“Editing is a kind of surgery—and have you ever seen a surgeon sitting to perform an operation?” (44)—just a great quote.

This is a good cardinal tenet: “there comes a point where [the editor] becomes invisible” and the characters, shots, emotions take over (50). It seems often times, that editing comes down to feeling out cuts, not making them based upon any list of rules—“you can only have faith” (56).

Given the blink theory, should we be conscious of actors blinking while cutting dialogue scenes—and cut them to their “understanding”? Never mind—he discusses it on 65; also on 65, it seems that he always marks an out-point on the fly—that’s interesting.

The subconscious power of film is incredible—to have the audience “thinking together”—suppressing coughs and blinks; I guess that’s why propagandist films were able to have the psychological impact they did.

“This lack of screen resolution […] would encourage the editor to make more use of close-ups than was necessary” (93)—I definitely found that this was the case while editing Joe’s footage; I relied heavily on the close-up, given that the image quality was so much better.

He reiterates marking on the fly for the last frame, and also, notes that he always made the first assembly of a scene without sound—and I’m not sure why he’d so this; isn’t the editing process somewhat dictated by the script and its sound? And it’s amazing to meditate on how far technology has advanced—“pedals,” “flywheel” (105).

“I expect the material itself to tell me what to do”—the drawback of digital editing is that the machine “gives me only what I ask for” (109). I think there is something to be said about the digitization taking away some of the palpability of  film—and the ability to interact with the medium in a reciprocal relationship—especially given the importance of the “decisive moment”—“having your whole body engaged […] like a gunslinger” (118).

I think it’s important to note his discussion on the “different aesthetics” involved in cutting cinema, as compared to music videos and commercials. I remember discussing this in class briefly—the rate of cuts in commercials, the rapid pace. For music videos, I’d assume the cuts are entirely dictated by the rhythm of the music.

I think his question on Page 130 has been answered: it seems that one editor cannot [entirely] handle vertical and horizontal editing (i.e. the need for an FX team on certain productions)—though there are an increasing number of effects becoming available within NLE systems.

I loved the closing passages, the magnification of the experience of cinema within a theatre—“the true cinematic experience can’t be had at home” (144).