John Huston by Louise Sweeney, filmcritic of
theChristianScienceMonitor [whatever that means.]
London
We are sitting in a brick mews house in the middle of
London, and director John Huston is giving a 30-second course in filmmaking.
“To me the perfect film is as though it were
unwinding behind your eyes, and your eyes were projecting it themselves, so
that you were seeing what you wished to see. It’s like thought. It’s the
closest to thought process of any art.”
Mr. Huston illustrated the point in his own unique
way. “Look at that lamp,” he says, pointing to a brass floor lamp halfway
across the dark green room. “Now look at me. Look back at the lamp. Now look at
me. Do you see what you did? [the second time.] You blinked. Those are cuts.
After the first time you know that there’s no reason to pan from me to the
lamp, because you know what’s in between. Your mind cuts [the scene]. You
behold the lamp. And you behold me. So in cutting the scene you cut with the
physiology.”
Thoughts.
Quoted in theBlinkOfAnEye byWalterMUrch.
Blink equals cut. How should I proceed to examine
this thought?
Sentence equals cut. Toosimplistic?
Sentence = Blink = Cut? Veryunsatisfactory.
I won’t attempt to examine what happens inside the
brain.
Blink = oneobject.closeup?
What about the each essentials of twoobjects becomes
oneobject? Twowords becomes one? Fallibility of memory?
Individual difference. Onewords produces various
images not exactly the sames. Oneimage produces various words not exactly the
sames. But I not investigate individual difference.
Suppose. Cinémascope. Thewidestlens. Many persons are
in the same frame, like twothousand. It is impossible to memorise it. The way
is to save them onebyone. Then, try to make groups.
Some kind of jump is required for cut? Blink because
connexion is required? No blink if no connex. is required? Or. No blink when
connex. is required? Blink if connex. is required?
No comments:
Post a Comment