CUT TO:
Medium shot of cops, who struggle to release Thornwald’s grip on Jeff.
One cop turns, realizing that Jeff now has nothing to hang on to.
CUT TO:
Medium shot of Jeff shooting down on his face and foreshortened body as he slowly falls.
FRAME GRAB #28
CUT TO:
Medium side shot of Jeff, shooting from ground as Jeff falls, face down, arms splayed.
FRAME GRAB #29
He falls down onto the ground.
CUT TO:
Medium close shot of Jeff, shooting from behind. He rolls onto back, to face camera, in agony and then his body is still.
FRAME GRAB #30
DECONSTRUCTION
Scene edited by George Tomasini
Hitchcock said:
I do shoot a precut picture. In other words, every piece of film is designed to perform a function. So therefore, literally, the only type of editing that I do is to tighten up. If a man’s coming through the door, going into the room, then you just pull that together by just snippets. But actual creative work in the cutting, for me, is nonexistent, because it is designed ahead of time—precut, which it should be.14…Where the work of the average editor comes in is when he’s given a lot of film to sort out. This is when directors use many angles of the same scene. But I never do that. As a matter of fact when Rear Window was finished somebody went into the cutting room and said, “Where are the outtakes? Where is the unused film?” And there was a small roll of a hundred feet. [Ninety feet of film runs a minute.] That was all that was left over. 15
The typical ratio of shot film to edited film ranges from about ten to one through forty to one, depending on the director’s method of working and the budget. Using those ratios, Rear Window, which is 112 minutes long, should have had between eleven and forty-four minutes of leftover film. Hitchcock claimed he had barely over a minute.
Another version of how Hitchcock worked comes from Sam O’Steen, who was assistant to editor George Tomasini on an earlier Hitchcock movie, The Wrong Man. According to O’Steen, Hitchcock never saw any film before the first cut and then when he ran it, he said:
George, what’d you do that for, you know I never do that, you just go this way and that way.” But Hitchcock made only three or four changes, because the way he shot, there was only one way it would go together, and that was his way.… As a matter of fact, he had the same amount of trims [leftover film] as he had cut [a ratio of one to one].… Then he ran the picture with his agent, and he loved it; at least he said he did — and that was it. Hitchcock never ran it again, never saw it. He was just gone.16
Hitchcock’s assistant director Herbert Colemen went on to explain:
They only shot a scene up to a certain point, then he would change the angle of the camera and start back maybe a few frames and then start the new scene, and then he would stop and go to another angle. That’s the way he shot his pictures, so it was very simple for the editor.17
Because of the unique way in which Hitchcock worked, the primary references below will be to Hitchcock’s choices rather than the editor’s. However, it should be noted that Hitchcock did have a long-term relationship with his editor, George Tomasini, who had done seven movies with him before this one. So that even though he did not have the freedom to choose shots the way most editors did, he had to have the insights to be in tune with what Hitchcock wanted and the skill to finesse the cuts.
As he did in all of his movies, in Rear Window Hitchcock made brilliant use of both the subjective and objective viewpoints.
Hitchcock:
His [Jeff’s] viewpoint becomes his mental processes by the use of the camera and the montage and this is what I actually mean by subjective treatment.… The audience are with Stewart [the actor playing Jeff]. The identification is direct and therefore they must feel superior to the other characters with him but the frustration is there all the same.… The objective treatment is also used when necessary.18
In fact, Hitchcock switches to an objective POV at a crucial point just before this scene. Up until then the audience has seen virtually the whole movie from Jeff’s subjective POV. But then, just for a few seconds, Jeff turns away from his window and only the audience sees Thornwald leaving his apartment. By doing this, Hitchcock gives the audience the thrill of anticipation. When and how will Jeff find out what we already know? Allowing the audience to become coconspirators with the director at that key moment is a great recipe for setting up the suspense that follows.
Previous to this scene, Jeff had the use of both sound and visuals to help him figure out what was happening beyond his apartment, even if he did strain to hear what people were saying. But now, as his attacker approaches and he remains confined to a wheelchair, sound effects play an especially powerful role in creating suspense. All Jeff has are the noises beyond his apartment — door slams and footsteps — to clue him in on his approaching attacker. Hitchcock saves the first close-up of Jeff for when he hears a door slam down the hall, and now the threat is real. His eyes dart in that direction and then his head turns. The “out” frame of the shot (Frame grab #1) comes after he’s turned his head away from the screen toward the slammed door. The next shot is his POV of the front door and the light underneath (Frame grab #2). The following close-up of Jeff milks the moment, because now the camera is shooting down at him, that angle making him look more helpless. His face starts out in half shadow and now he turns until the full light falls on his face after he has slowly turned his wheelchair around in the direction of the door (the “out” frame is Frame grab #3).
frame grab 1
frame grab 2
frame grab 3
The editor now cuts back to the same shot of the light under the door, then back to Jeff. He moves his wheelchair back and forth in a panic and then struggles to get out of the wheelchair but realizes he can’t. Then, just when he’s most vulnerable, he sees the light go off under the door, meaning the killer has turned off the light in the hallway and Jeff is at the point of no return. Then the door slowly opens, first just revealing a sliver of light, then Thornwald in silhouette, then in half light with a creepy reflection of light from his eyeglasses (the “out” frame is Frame grab #4). This milks the arrival of the villain for all it’s worth.
frame grab 4
Up until now the POV was only Jeff’s, but once Thornwald enters Jeff’s apartment, the POVs alternate between the two characters. In the ensuing dialogue between Jeff and Thornwald, the fact that Hitchcock cuts back and forth between Thornwald’s POV of Jeff (Frame grab #5) and Jeff’s POV of Thornwald (Frame grab #6) also makes Thornwald seem more human as he pleads with Jeff. (There is pathos in the way Hitchcock depicts all the villains in his movies, and in this case when Thornwald says, “Why did you do it?” Hitchcock is placing some blame on Jeff for being a Peeping Tom.) In those crucial first moments of confrontation, Jeff and Thornwald are both faceless and in shadows, particularly Thornwald, whose legs barely appear out from the shadows as he starts to come down a step further into the apartment at the end of the shot (that “out” frame is Frame grab #6).
frame grab 5
frame grab 6
The back and forth of POVs continue in the following four shots:
The “out” frame of the first shot (Frame grab #7) shows Jeff holding up a flash. The next shot reveals the impact from his POV, which is the first time Jeff and the audience sees Thornwald in full light — but just momentarily, when his image is eerily brightened from the camera’s flash (Frame grab #8). Again sound is used significantly, since we never see the flash actually go off; we just hear and see its effect.
frame grab 7
frame grab 8
The next shot is a close-up of Thornwald squinting from the effect of the flash (Frame grab #9) and then the flash’s after effects on Thornwald’s eyes when he sees a red ball of light superimposed over Jeff’s image (Frame grab #10).
frame grab 9
frame grab 10<
br />
The previous sequence — Frame Grabs #6, #7, #8, #9, and #10 — repeats itself three more times, with Thornwald barely getting closer to Jeff each time.
The fact that Jeff is able to hold Thornwald back by temporarily blinding him with his flashbulbs, not once but again and again and again, all in the space of a fairly small room, is pretty unbelievable. But the audience is willing to suspend disbelief and let Hitchcock milk movie time to the limit, because of the suspenseful intercutting of shots and because they want to buy time for Jeff. In the next shot (the “out” frame is Frame grab #11), he looks over his shoulder and then we see his POV across the courtyard in Frame grab #12.
frame grab 11
frame grab 12
Jeff’s POV reaches a climax when Thornwald moves straight toward the camera and his arms reach menacingly toward Jeff (the “out” frame of that shot is Frame grab #13). Now the movie shifts from suspense to genuine terror, and the POV changes from subjective to objective. This starts with the shot shown in Frame grab #14 when Thornwald’s hands are wrapped around Jeff’s throat.
frame grab 13
frame grab 14
Hitchcock:
Where Jimmy Stewart is thrown out of the window at the end, I just photographed that with feet, legs, arms, heads. Completely montage. I also photographed it from a distance, a complete action. There was no comparison between the two. There never is.… it’s much more effective if it’s done in montage because you involve the audience much more. That’s the secret of that type of montage in film.19…The moment the man attacks him… the moment of contact, then you are into your pieces of film. You involve the audience right in the sense of the violence. 20
frame grab 15
frame grab 16
frame grab 17
There are two crucial points in Jeff’s and Thornwald’s ensuing struggle, and in both cases Hitchcock uses the same pattern: he establishes the action with a long shot and then keeps the camera close. The first point is when Thornwald tips the wheelchair over (the “out” frame is Frame grab #15) and then in the shots shown in Frame grab #16 and #17, when he shoots close on Jeff’s leg cast and head, respectively.
The second point is when Thornwald is actually lifting Jeff’s legs up and over the window sill (the “out” frame is Frame grab #18). That is followed by a closer camera with Thornwald’s back filling the frame, which captures the impotence of Jeff struggling under Thornwald’s weight and power (the “out” frame of that shot is Frame grab #19). The visuals, in fact, consistently emphasize not only Jeff’s disabled state, but also how frail his physique is, compared to Thornwald’s bulky frame.
frame grab 18
frame grab 19
When they react to the sounds of Jeff and Thornwald’s struggle, the neighbors are now seen from an objective POV, an example being the shot of “Miss Lonelyheart” (Frame grab #20). It’s a much closer angle than Jeff’s actual perspective, which was all the audience had seen before this scene.
In the setup of the following two shots, Hitchcock knew it would be physically impossible to have Thornwald actually lift Jeff up in one move and hang him over the side of the building. Even if it were possible, it would slow the movie down at a crucial moment. For that reason, Hitchcock jumps the action. In the shot shown in Frame grab #21, Thornwald’s upper torso is still above the window sill, and he’s standing upright. In the subsequent shot (Frame grab #22), Thornwald is leaning far over the window sill and Jeff is dangling out the window. This cut works for two reasons. First, because there is that “action-cut” effect, a clear change in angle from one shot to the other. What also smooths out the transition is that in the second shot, Thornwald’s body almost covers up Jeff’s face, which functions as a sort of “wipe” across the screen, neutralizing the mismatch.
frame grab 20
frame grab 21
frame grab 22
Then the drama escalates with a series of even closer shots of Thornwald’s face (Frame grab #23), Jeff’s fingers (Frame grab #24), and Jeff’s agonized face (Frame grab #25), which again repeat the pattern of the establishing shot followed by the “montage” effect.
frame grab 23
frame grab 24
frame grab 25
The second mismatched cut occurs in the next pair of shots. Hitchcock needed to show a cop throw a gun up to Doyle from the patio below and also show him aim at Thornwald, who’s gripping onto Jeff’s body as it hangs out the second-story window. Logistically he couldn’t accomplish that in one shot, so he had to cheat the staging and cut two shots together. In the first shot Doyle’s arm moves up to a shooting position (the “out” frame is Frame grab #26) and in the next one Doyle aims his gun toward Thornwald, who is now included in the shot (the “in” frame is Frame grab #27). The camera was positioned differently in each of the shots, as was Doyle, the fence behind him, and even the angle of his arm. But Hitchcock knew that the audience would focus on the movement of Doyle’s gun and on Jeff hanging out of the window in the second shot.
frame grab 26
frame grab 27
The third mismatch happens when Jeff falls from the window onto the ground. In the shot shown in (the “out” frame is Frame grab #28), the camera shoots straight down at him, heightening his victimization. The shot is also scarily distorted — an optical matting of his body onto the background — which shows us his face in the foreground and foreshortened body looking twisted and vertical below. The subsequent shot (the “in” frame is Frame grab #29) is shot from the ground level and shows Jeff in a completely different position, face down with his arms spread out. But Hitchcock counted on the momentum and emotional impact of such a dramatic fall to make the cut seem smooth.
The “out” frame of the shot shown in Frame grab #30 reveals how the editor cut out the moment when Jeff is totally still, after falling. The timing is just right for cheating the audience into thinking that Jeff may be dead, but the editor doesn’t linger long enough to keep it from being believable when Jeff turns out to be fine. (Just more broken legs, it turns out!)
frame grab 28
frame grab 29
frame grab 30
MYSTERY: CHINATOWN
This genre is based on suspense, but it also falls into the dialogue-driven category, since mysteries rely heavily on the spoken word and what it reveals about the characters’ secrets and motivations. Of course visual details provide crucial clues as well. As a result, the editor has to time exactly when he’ll cut to, say, an arched eyebrow or a close-up of a weapon. The editor must also be especially aware of subtext in the dialogue, since the hidden meanings that flow beneath the surface can often motivate the cuts. For example, if an editor milks a silent pause, he can create an almost unbearable tension, because what’s not being said can be more significant than what is.
Mysteries are generally more subjective than objective, because part of the fun is letting the audience solve the puzzle along with the main character, who is often a detective. In a mystery, another subjective device is to have the protagonist speak in a voiceover narrative, like many of the detectives in Dashiell Hammett and Raymond Chandler’s novels, some of which were adapted into classic film noir movies.
FRAME GRAB ILLUSTRATION: CHINATOWN
Chinatown is true to the film noir genre in that the detective, Gittes (played by Jack Nicholson) is both honorable yet tarnished. But as Roman Polanski, the director of Chinatown said: “ Its private eye hero, J. J. Gittes, was no pale, down-at-the-heel imitation of Marlowe. [Phillip Marlowe is the quintessential detective in Raymond Chandler’s novels.] Robert Towne, the scriptwriter, had conceived him as a glamorous, successful operator, a snappy dresser with a coolly insolent manner — a new archetypal detective figure. ”21
The female lead also deviates from the typical femme fatale. Evelyn Mulwray (played by Faye Dunaway) is sensual and mysterious but not the plotting black widow, although her incessant lying and deception make her seem so at first. She actually turns out to be the only charact
er in the story who is operating out of purely decent motives.
Polanski said that he saw Chinatown “not as a ‘retro piece’ or a conscious imitation of classic movies shot in black and white, but as a film about the thirties seen through the camera eye of the seventies.… I wanted the style of the period conveyed by a scrupulously accurate reconstruction of décor, costume, and idiom — not a deliberate imitation, in 1973, of thirties film techniques.”22
Most movies that were shot in the thirties had a somewhat stagy and static look, in contrast to Polanski’s movies, which have a very dynamic and innovative style. In fact, Polanski’s method was so fluid that he never even shot an all-inclusive master shot. According to Sam O’Steen, who edited Chinatown: “What Polanski did was maybe have people move in and out of frame, or the camera might pan back and forth or the shot may open up to include everything for part of the scene, but the camera was always active. So when I had to cut in close, it was a challenge.…” O’Steen said he loved cutting Polanski’s pictures, because it was “like a great jigsaw puzzle you put together.”23
The Invisible Cut Page 12