This Part Of The Movie Went On Too Long

The essence of leadership in editing lies in the ability to balance different visual elements, such as alternating close-ups with wide shots, to create a coherent experience for the viewer.

Arriving at the editing stage, Eisenstein begins his usual improvisation. He now finds shortcomings in the construction of the film, his mistakes. He realizes, for example, a lack of clarity in the battle montage composition. For the viewer to be able to clearly follow the action, strong points of support are necessary. However, at the editing table, he notices an omission: the multitude of close-ups is not enough to create the real sensation of a battle. The general plans that clearly depict a mass of combatants penetrating another mass are missing. And he has to shoot an entire table scene in addition.

Clarity in the presentation of the battle depends, he now realizes, on the clarity of the alternation of its phases. Watching the montage of the fights, he becomes convinced that this part of the film went on too long. That's why he wants to cut 200 meters of the film. But he's not allowed to, and so this scene, supposed to be a total perfection, is actually two hundred meters longer than the director would have liked.

Clarity in the presentation of a scene depends on the balance between close-ups and wide shots, which provide the viewer with visual reference points.

“In cinematic architecture, creating an effective montage requires careful planning and a deep understanding of visual narrative. Directors, like landscape architects, must consider both the 'natural' elements of the film, such as the action and emotions of the actors, as well as the 'constructed' elements, such as shot composition and camera movements.

A balanced composition of a battle scene involves the judicious use of close-ups and general shots, creating a pleasing visual rhythm and a fluid flow of action through the frames. The choice and placement of shots play a crucial role in defining the different phases of the fight and creating anchor points for the viewer.

An effective film production leader must be prepared to compromise, sometimes accepting decisions that are inconsistent with his original vision, such as the length of a scene.

In the process of improvisation at the editing table, the director, like an experienced landscape architect, can identify shortcomings in the 'topography' of his film. He can see that the dense 'vegetation' of close-ups is not enough to create the real feel of a battle, requiring 'open spaces' in the form of general shots that clearly depict the masses of combatants.

Clarity in the presentation of the battle depends on the balanced alternation between different types of frames, just as the beauty of a garden depends on the alternation between open and closed spaces. Repeated viewing of the sequence may reveal excessive extension, similar to a too-long garden path, which would require 'trimming' to optimize the viewing experience.

In the end, even if the director would like to 'sow' 200 meters of his film, external restrictions may limit this option, resulting in a more extensive 'cinematic garden' than its creator originally intended."

Clarity in the presentation of a scene depends on the balance between close-ups and wide shots, which provide the viewer with visual cues designed to guide attention to the essential elements of the narrative.

This part of the film stretched too long because Eisenstein needed extra time to shoot the missing general shots, knowing that these shots were essential to render the clarity and scope of the action in accordance with his original artistic vision. Of course, the role of general shots goes beyond simply completing scenes, by creating the overall perspective necessary to convey a sense of scale and drama.

* Note: Ion Barna - Eisenstein, Tineretului Publishing House, 1966.