Nonlinear Memories

[filmscheduling]

Do you remember events in sequences, or in disjointed flashes? Is all you remember of your childhood a selection of key memories, such as your first day at school or the time a sibling ditched you during a game of hide and seek?

It’s hard to think like most computers do, as a sequence of computations. Instead, we flash from association to association, using symbols (words) as placeholders for ideas and things.

Linguists have found that language is hardwired into the brain. But of course animals can understand language too - from Dogs to Dolphins to Parrots to Monkeys.

In physics, time t+1 necessarily follows time t — at least where I live. But a story told in a strict linear fashion can often sound flat - perhaps because there is less resonance with the “nonlinear mind”.

Film editors attempt to resonate with the human cognitive process by quick flashes between shots, desaturated colors, and out of sequence stories. After all, would the film “Memento” be as fascinating if told in chronological order? Were the Greeks onto something by structuring theatre acts out of chronological sequence? Even in that age, they realized that linear can be boring.

Can we alter our way of thinking by exposure to new literary and filmic forms, or are we doomed to only one mechanism of thought?

Hmm…

 

[knightly]

Tarantino had Kill Bill and Pulp that were completely out of sequence. He has an interview on the pulp disk where he talks about using non-linear time in the way novellists do to unfold little parts of the story that hint toward pieces which happen later and earlier in the story. He uses it to control how he reveals information to the audience as far as I can tell.

Worst example: closer...I want that 2 hours of my life back.

 

[filmscheduling]

Tarantino had Kill Bill and Pulp that were completely out of sequence. He has an interview on the pulp disk where he talks about using non-linear time in the way novellists do to unfold little parts of the story that hint toward pieces which happen later and earlier in the story. He uses it to control how he reveals information to the audience as far as I can tell.

Worst example: closer...I want that 2 hours of my life back.

I think it seems best to use nonlinear storytelling if it adds to the momentum of the edit. If you have dead spots you can unfold parts of the future. I liked how Tarantino did that in KB2..

The question is, was Pulp Fiction created in the edit room, or was the plan all along in the script to edit that way? Is the original script in that sequence?

 

[knightly]

don't remember anything other than him talking about it...sorry, details are on the DVD if I need them.

 

[dylan61]

And of course even Tarantino would give props to the master Kubrik for the film "The Killing". One of the earlier, non-sequential films that still kicks a ton of ass. I think non-linear storytelling is becoming more of a norm now. I think that can be attributed to the introduction of computers and non-linear editing into mainstream filmmaking. Kubrik definitely had to plan his story and structure out in detail before he shot and edited "The Killing", but now, it's as simple as moving your cursor to see what a scene would look like here or there. I think you can see the introduction of the non-linear editing system's effect on Oliver Stone's style the best. It's like he was waiting for an Avid and didn't even know it. But once it was there, he went nuts with different formats and non-sequential storytelling. Now, I think he's had his fun and is coming back to a more linear form.

I think what it comes down to is what's best for the story. How can you best reveal the beats of the story that turn everything around and give the audience the information they need in an exciting revelation? Sometimes it works to go out of sequence, sometimes it's best to just tell the story straight forward. Forced flashbacks and out of sequence scenes that are just thrown in to try to be "cutting edge" are just an example of someone who doesn't really understand the reason for the rules and is still trying to break them. I used to think this in film school when my classmates would make some completely incoherent, poorly directed, underlit atrocity then claim they were "breaking the rules". I always thought of that as just an excuse for not knowing how to do it right in the first place.

 

[filmscheduling]

Sometimes it works to go out of sequence, sometimes it's best to just tell the story straight forward. Forced flashbacks and out of sequence scenes that are just thrown in to try to be "cutting edge" are just an example of someone who doesn't really understand the reason for the rules and is still trying to break them. I used to think this in film school when my classmates would make some completely incoherent, poorly directed, underlit atrocity then claim they were "breaking the rules". I always thought of that as just an excuse for not knowing how to do it right in the first place.

The chemistry of time is one of the most fascinating things about film - in fact I think it's what sets it apart from the other art forms. It's difficult to go nonlinear in theatre, music, ballet, painting, etc. Theatre can be somewhat nonlinear but not to the extreme that film can be.

In the edit, placing just ten seconds of a scene elsewhere can affect the entire chemistry of the piece.

David Lynch seems fascinated with this whole process and I can't wait to see Inland Empire..

 

[sonnyboo]

The question is, was Pulp Fiction created in the edit room, or was the plan all along in the script to edit that way? Is the original script in that sequence?

Yes, the screenplay is NON-LINEAR. All of his scripts are that way. Even TRUE ROMANCE, but Tony Scott re-edited it to a linear story as he could not make it work for himself that way.