How about the blown-out match/desert sun cut in "Lawrence of Arabia"?
--
- Sol L. Siegel, Philadelphia, PA USA
Good catch!
Dave in Toronto
The end of "North By Northwest"
A couple of scenes in "Highlander"
"Duck Amuck"
--
Halmyre
This is the most powerful sigfile in the world and will probably blow your
head clean off.
>How about the blown-out match/desert sun cut in "Lawrence of Arabia"?
That's one of my all-time favorite scenes.
Another scene is the time and space scene changing a bone into a space
ship in 2001, A Space Odyssey.
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
The close-up of Norman Bates in which you can just make out his
mothers preserved face, then the car being hauled out og the swamp.
Pjk
Without being spoiler-ish, DARK CITY.
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
--
Bill Anderson
I am the Mighty Favog
> Another scene is the time and space scene changing a bone into a space
> ship in 2001, A Space Odyssey.
Isn't that what was implied in the thread title? d;>)
Which Michael Powell did 20+ years earlier in "A Canterbury Tale"--a
swooping falcon from Chaucer's time changes into a diving Spitfire.
>> Another scene is the time and space scene changing a bone into a space
>> ship in 2001, A Space Odyssey.
>
>Isn't that what was implied in the thread title? d;>)
Ahh, my reader truncated the title.
The segue from the bar to Viet Nam in "The Deer Hunter".
>The end of "North By Northwest"
For those of us who look to Hitchcock stories where every detail can
be very important, this film can be a real disappointment.
Hanging on by your finger tipsfacing certai death and then suddenly
being on your honeymoon aboard a train? It may be a great ending from
some, but I might as well have been watching a cartoon.
It was while making this film that Hitchcock reportedly told someone,
we don't make pictures any more...
Rich Wagner
But what purpose would it serve to show the technicalities of Thornhill
rescuing Eve? Followed by Thornhill proposing to Eve (or vice-versa), and
then the wedding scene, and the taxi to the station, and then pulling her up
into the bunk...
>But what purpose would it serve to show the
> technicalities of Thornhill rescuing Eve?
> Followed by Thornhill proposing to Eve (or
> vice-versa), and then the wedding scene, and
> the taxi to the station, and then pulling her up
> into the bunk...
Technicalities?
Since it would have been impossible for them to survive, I'd love to
have the film try to explain.
The issue isn't jumping ahead; it's about leaving them in an
impossible situation and then pretend that they could have survived.
How long did you expect them to be able to hold on?
All you need do is watch the ending to see that it's impossible!
In the original King Kong, the men are lazing around the big door with
slow, island type music in the background, then it cuts to Driscoll
and Ann frantically running through the jungle with, presumably, Kong
in pursuit.
It's a gag ...lampooning the fact that the whole movie has been one
impossible escape after another. And, not only is it a gag, it's
followed by *another*gag ...lampooning the fact that yet another
(movie-long) impossibility is about to be breached. These are
'continuity failures' only hyper-literally, and are more reasonably
understood as winks that ask the audience to read between the lines.
>It's a gag ...lampooning the fact that the whole
> movie has been one impossible escape after
> another. And, not only is it a gag, it's followed
> by *another*gag ...lampooning the fact that
> yet another (movie-long) impossibility is about
> to be breached. These are 'continuity failures'
> only hyper-literally, and are more reasonably
> understood as winks that ask the audience to
> read between the lines.
Exactly. It's just like a cartoon (and most films today).
When I read between the lines, everything about the ending is still
preposterous. That's not how early Hitchcock films were, even when
there was a surprise.
Of course back then, it was Alma Revelle (Hitchcock's wife), who
handled the continuity.
Rich Wagner
> > >But what purpose would it serve to show the
> > > technicalities of Thornhill rescuing Eve?
> > > Followed by Thornhill proposing to Eve (or
> > > vice-versa), and then the wedding scene, and
> > > the taxi to the station, and then pulling her up
> > > into the bunk...
> >
> > Technicalities?
> >
> > ?? Since it would have been impossible for them to survive, I'd love to
> > have the film try to explain.
> > ?? The issue isn't jumping ahead; it's about leaving them in an
> > impossible situation and then pretend that they could have survived.
> > How long did you expect them to be able to hold on? ?? ??
> >
> > All you need do is watch the ending to see that it's impossible!
> It's a gag ...lampooning the fact that the whole movie has been one
> impossible escape after another. And, not only is it a gag, it's
> followed by *another*gag ...lampooning the fact that yet another
> (movie-long) impossibility is about to be breached. These are
> 'continuity failures' only hyper-literally, and are more reasonably
> understood as winks that ask the audience to read between the lines.
Besides, there's a similar massive improbability in _The 39 Steps_.
--
alt.flame Special Forces
"We have no right to assume that any physical laws exist, or if they have
existed up to now, that they will continue to exist in a similar manner in
the future." -- Max Planck
And in 'Vertigo'. How does Jimmy Stewart get down off that roof? (answers of
"It's all a dream" are not acceptable...)