The Development and Principles of Editing - Analysing a Sequence

Film editing has evolved since early film-making, however the first films that featured cuts and more than one shot appeared as early as 1901. Over the decades, film editing has evolved from literally 'cutting' celluloid film strips and sticking them back together to digital technology being able to make the 'cutting' process as easy as clicking the mouse. The process of editing involves creating a sequence out of raw film shots to create a finished film or video. 'In-camera' editing involves filming the raw footage in the order needed for the sequence, which is commonly used with films with low budgets or unable to edit in any way. However, this technique is hardly used today. Instead, both digital and film are used and edited in a non-linear process. The raw footage can be shot in any order as the order is then determined by editing into a sequence during post-production. Software such as Adobe Premiere is an example of a non-linear editing process. [1]

Video:



I have chosen Michael Moore’s Bowling for Columbine (2003) as my example. I have chosen this film as it is a documentary that heavily uses a variety of editing techniques. The film utilizes mainly cuts for its transitions, however it does also use dissolves/cross-fades and fades, where one image either fades to black or two images fade into each other. The sequence starting at 0:00:57 to 0:01:40 starts with a fade from black and dissolves between the select clips, before then cutting between selected clips, mainly establishing shots of fields and cities. The sequence ends with another cross-fade between a woman holding a gun to the Statue of Liberty. The use of the fade at the end of this sequence is an example of contrapuntal imagery; as the woman is in a similar pose to the Statue of Liberty. This is used to suggest to the audience that America may be ‘gun crazy’, which is the entire message of the film.

In terms of continuity, Bowling for Columbine is fairly filmic for how some scenes are set up. A short sequence starting at 0:05:14 shows Charlton Heston holding a rifle and then cuts to Michael Moore doing the same. This is a shot-reverse-shot, as to the viewer it seems as if they are facing each other and firing at each other.

This is also an example of the 180° rule, however a better example can be seen from 0:12:41 to 0:13:16, where Moore and interviewee Nichols are talking side by side and we only see them from one side, although from different angles, they are all on one side of an imaginary 180° line. This rule is employed to help the audience from becoming disorientated by not confusing where the camera is placed and from what angle it is from. If the camera goes past the 180° line, then to the audience it will appear that Moore and Nichols have switched places.

The scene at 0:02:00 uses a match-cut on action, where Moore is looking through a catalogue of guns in the first shot, then cuts to a close up of the catalogue so we can see it clearly. This can be an example of motivated editing. Another example is an eyeline match-cut, used when a person looks out of frame, so it cuts to what the person is looking at or what is prompting the reaction in the preceding shot. An example of this can be seen at 1:55:25 to 1:55:35, where Charlton Heston looks back at Michael Moore and then cuts to in front of Moore, where we see he is holding a picture of a girl. This particular sequence can also be an example of a point of view shot, as we see Moore from Heston’s perspective. However, being a documentary and not a constructed narrative, point of view shots are hardly used. Also, as this shot appears to jump between a POV from Moore and a POV from Heston, this is an example of multiple points of view.

However, despite being a documentary, the film still is able to establish Michael Moore as the main protagonist. Moore is present throughout almost all of the film, whether through voice over or during interview, he has the most screen-time throughout. Occasionally a close up is used on a person, an example being at 0:15:37 to 0:15:44, where it cuts from Brent playing snooker to a close up shot during interview. Close ups are used in Bowling for Columbine, especially in interview sequences, when something of particular interest is said or found. For example, during the Nichols interview, a close up is used at 0:14:10, after Nichols says how overthrowing a ‘tyrannical government’ is ‘your duty’. This could be used to show how he reacts to Moore’s questioning. Also, shortly after this at 0:16:05, during an interview with DJ, the camera slowly gets closer and closer as he reveals how after Columbine he was on a list of suspicious people who may cause threats. Also during this sequence at 0:16:37, there is a jump cut, it is of the same interview however it is from a slightly different angle. In the film, it typically appears as unintentional, as the shots aren't framed by a cinematographer and are probably done on the spot by the cameraman and Moore selects them during post-production.

More than likely, the causes of jump cuts in Bowling for Columbine would be something interrupting an interview or something irrelevant at that time and was subsequently cut out. A reaction shot is used to show the reaction of a person to an event or action. One example in the film is at 0:13:44, where Nichols says “If you say anything I’ll shoot you!”. It then cuts to a reaction shot of Michael Moore sitting opposite. This can also be an example of how the 180° rule helps the audience to not become disorientated.

As Moore is seen as the ‘protagonist’ in the film, it is clear that the documentary uses filmic devices to help do this. Near the beginning at 0:03:19, Moore is given a gun and then walks outside from the bank, holding it up. This is an example of cutting to the soundtrack, as a montage of bowling clips and the titles appear.

The song (‘Take the Skinheads Bowling - Camper Van Beethoven’) is played and matched up with the footage on screen. There are a few times when a montage is used in Bowling for Columbine, one example is from 0:26:00 to 0:28:24 where clips of US foreign policy 'gone wrong' throughout the years up to 2001. This particular montage is used to help establish the viewpoint of Moore as the filmmaker and what attitude his film takes to certain issues, reflecting his own opinion and personality, especially during the aftermath of 9/11. Cutaways are also used frequently, an example being at 1:11:35 when Moore and an interviewee refer to Canada. It then cuts to a Taco Bell in Ontario, Canada, where he is interviewing 3 Canadian students.

Also during these interview sequences, there is a typical use of shot variation, where during the same scene different shots are used to help create flow. This can also be an example of a jump-cut. An example of how the editing rhythm is important for the flow of the film can be seen in a Marilyn Manson interview from 0:45:14 to 0:47:51. There are a variation of shots of differing lengths throughout, as a single static shot that lasts a couple of minutes would slow the movie down and the audience would lose interest. Creating a rhythm in the editing helps create a less intrusive feel and helps the audience focus on the story and dialogue rather than what the shot is trying to focus on. A variation in shots and the use of a handheld camera creates a feel of unobtrusiveness, allowing the audience to fully become engrossed in the story/dialogue. 

Finally, as is typical with Moore, being a politically motivated filmmaker, he does provide and withhold certain information from the audience, depending on how the information can be used to explain and strengthen his viewpoint.

An example of this is again during the 'gun at the bank' sequence at 0:03:19. Moore presents this sequence as if it happened within a short time on one day, where in actuality Moore had to wait 5 days before he could get his gun from the bank. He wore the same clothes on both days to make the sequence feel as if it was as easy to walk into a bank and pick up a gun in minutes. Moore withheld the information of the waiting period from the audience so he could prove his point on gun control and how easy it is to get a gun. He also cuts to the soundtrack before the bank has a chance to explain their reasoning for "handing out guns at a bank". Despite being a documentary, it is difficult to use the technique of parallel editing/cross-cutting, where sequences appear to be happening in conjunction/at the same time. However there is a segment between about 0:12:50 and 0:19:44 where it starts with an interview with Nichols and then cuts to an interview with Brent, then an interview with DJ and then back to Nichols. As we had already seen near the beginning of the sequence, it was getting dark outside whilst Moore was interviewing Nichols. A few minutes later when we cut to Brent and DJ, we can see it is dark and at night. Despite the context of being an interview situation with Moore present at each and the interviews probably being days or even weeks apart, it feels as if they are taking place at the same time, or thereabouts.

[1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_editing