Continuity Vs Discontinuity Editing in Film

Introduction

There are some studies that contest the importance of continuity editing rules in film's comprehension, presenting a debate of continuity vs discontinuity. Instead, they suggest that editing errors and discontinuity do not obstruct or disorient viewers' attention and the most important aspect for understanding the storyline is the narrative consistency. Attention is primarily directed to understand the succession of events, rather than to perceptual inconsistencies (Germeys & d'Ydewalle 129).

The Rules of Continuity Editing

With regards to the aforementioned continuity editing techniques, Berliner and Cohen state that if a filmmaker wants to convey they narrative flawlessly on behalf of the viewer, they need to “obey” the rules of classical continuity editing. Continuity as a technical and aesthetic choice is thus considered, by many film theorists and filmmakers, a natural necessity. But, in truth, these are just rules of thumb. The test of whether a stretch of cinematic sequencing is successful is whether or not it works - whether or not it communicates, whether or not an audience can follow it, whether or not it achieves the effect the image maker intends. For every alleged rule of filmmaking, one can come up with cinematically distinguished counterexamples. In the book, ’Eye Guidance in Reading and Scene Perception’, Géry d’Ydewalle highlights three categories of editing rules and their respective editing violations (129).

Discontinuity Violations in Film Continuity

First-order violations refers either to some displacements of camera or changes to image size that disrupts the smooth flow between the shots (i.e., jump cuts). Jump cuts are produced by an elliptical cut between two shots that appears to be an interruption of a single shot due to the position of the camera that vary very slightly. The instant changes of either background or figures in the same scene between the two shots or changes in image size of the shots give the impression of jumping and disturb the smooth flow from one shot to the next one. Jump cuts are usually avoided in continuity editing because it draws attention to the structure of the movie (i.e., editing and cuts) obstructing viewers’ attention to the narration. However, Jean-Luc Godard employs jump cuts in a number of films, including Breathless, where they function as a sort of expressive punctuation, signalling the improvisatory temper of the film and its filmmaker. Viewers do not interpret these edits as rents in the fabric of the universe, but as signs of auditorial exuberance. The jump cuts are perfectly intelligible to viewers, who understand them as the fingerprints of the auteur. Nor is the jump cut merely the gesture of a single moment of motion picture making. The use of jump cuts for expressive purposes appears in contemporary movies such as Ridley Scott’s Matchstick Man (Carrol 30).

Second-order violation refers to a violation of the 180 degree rule by ignoring the action axis of the location (i.e., reversed angle shots) and obstructing viewers to create a spatial-cognitive schema of the scene. According to the 180 degree rule, when filming a scene an imaginary line called axis of action is drawn through the middle of the scene or between the two major elements of the scene (e.g. in a conversation between two characters). Cameras, when filming, should remain within 180 degree field and not cross the axis, ensuring that edited shots would keep the position of objects and the direction of action consistent. Thus in the case of a conversation between two characters, the scene usually starts with an establishing shot of the two characters from a specific point of view showing the environment where the conversation takes place and at the same time indicating the axis that connects them. The next shots should continue showing each character from the same side of the axis so that the first character should always look at the right, while the second at the left, and also preserving the spatial continuity of the scene (Bordwell & Thompson 1993; Thompson, 2009).

A third-order violation occurs when the linear sequence of actions in a story is not obeyed (i.e. flashbacks). A series of studies examining the impact of narration in film comprehension revealed that editing violations did not cause, as filmmakers expect, confusion to the viewers when narrative continuity and consistency is maintained. In fact, the rationality of a nonlinear sequence is posed as a challenge to be solved by the spectators. Some examples of these non-linear narratives have been labelled puzzle films (Buckland, 2009, 2014), mind-game films (Elsaesser, 2009), forking-path narratives (Bordwell, 2002), modular narratives (Cameron, 2008) or multiple-draft- films (Branigan, 2002). Part of the challenge of these types of films is to understand why the story is told differently.  

Works Cited

1. Germeys, F., & d’Ydewalle, G. (2007). Eye Guidance in Reading and Scene Perception. Psychology Press.
2. Carrol, N. (1996). Theorizing the Moving Image. Cambridge University Press.
3. Bordwell, D., & Thompson, K. (1993). Film Art: An Introduction. McGraw-Hill Education.
4. Thompson, K. (2009). The New Biographical Dictionary of Film. Knopf.
5. Buckland, W. (2009). Puzzle Films: Complex Storytelling in Contemporary Cinema. Wiley-Blackwell.
6. Elsaesser, T. (2009). Puzzle Films: From the Ego to the Eco. Amsterdam University Press.
7. Cameron, A. (2008). Modular Narratives in Contemporary Cinema. Palgrave Macmillan.
8. Branigan, E. (2002). Narrative Comprehension and Film. Routledge.