See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264699645
Editing and the production of new meanings in films
Article · February 2014
CITATIONS
READS
0
806
1 author:
Giuseppe Pagano
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
5 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Giuseppe Pagano on 13 August 2014.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITÄT ZU BERLIN
BERLIN IN FILM - FILM IN BERLIN
EDITING AND THE PRODUCTION
OF NEW MEANINGS IN FILMS
TERM PAPER
GIUSEPPE PAGANO
INDEX
INDEX .............................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 2
1.1. EDITING: IN QUEST OF A DEFINITION .......................................................... 3
1.2. FILM SYNTAX ..................................................................................................... 3
1.3. KULESHOV EFFECT ........................................................................................... 6
2.1. EDITING IN PRACTICE ...................................................................................... 7
2.2. THE POINT OF VIEW EDITING IN THE FILM ‘DER HIMMEL ÜBER
BERLIN’ ............................................................................................................... 7
CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................... 12
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND SITOGRAPHY ................................................................... 13
1
INTRODUCTION
Editing represents a tool through which, in a film, the director achieves the production of new
meanings. The single image might, in fact, transmit to the viewer a different meaning than the one
perceived from its combination with additional images.
This work aims to demonstrate this thesis and to explain, in a short but at the same time thorough
way, how the viewer mostly tends to make connections between the different scenes, shots and even
single frames of the film and how the combination of images (montage) can produce new meanings.
Moreover, a fundamental aspect of this thesis will be the focus and the investigation of a film
belonging to the German film history, i.e. ‘Der Himmel über Berlin’. Thus, I will try to prove how
the employment of a specific editing technique, i.e. the ‘point of view editing’, has permitted the
film director Wim Wenders to convey to the viewers ideas and meanings which would not have
been communicated in the same way without this technique.
The term paper begins with a short introduction to the definition of the term ‘editing’, and continues
then in the explanation of the ‘film syntax’, focusing on technical notions such as frame, shot, scene
and sequence. The ‘Kuleshov effect’ is also investigated.
In the second part of this term paper it is explained how editing works in practice and, more
specifically, how point of view editing is employed in the film ‘Der Himmel über Berlin’ with
specific examples.
The term paper is completed with the realization of videos which have the purpose to explain in a
clearer and visual way what already explained in written word.
The term paper, considering time and given indications, does not have the aim to explain subjects in
depth, something which not even whole manuals always achieve. Nonetheless, it will be tried to
give the reader a clear comprehension of the discussed topics and, hopefully, an input into further
research.
2
1.1. EDITING: IN QUEST OF A DEFINITION
There is not a univocal definition of the term ‘editing’, which, additionally, is often used as
synonymous of ‘montage’ or ‘cutting and splicing’1.
However, the different definitions which have been found are all unanimous in defining ‘editing’ as
a process which allows the combination of basic cinematographic elements (usually shots) in order
to create bigger sets (scenes, sequences, cinematic wholes et cetera): “Film editing is a generic term
for a complex process which structures the film development, selects, arranges and organizes its
visual and acoustic elements …”,2 and here explained even more clearly: “Editing … is the process
by which the editor combines and coordinates individual shots into a cinematic whole”.3
Certainly, the process of editing is fundamental in the creation of new meaning, as can be deduced
by this quotation which defines ‘editing’ as: “… the creation of a sense or meaning not proper to
the images themselves but derived exclusively from their juxtaposition.”4
VIDEO 01: How editing produces new meaning
1.2. FILM SYNTAX
Cinema, like other art forms, such as music, can be considered as a system of signs which combine
with one another: “Films consist of pictures. The concrete film experience reveals itself as living
connected images, or rather picture sequences.”;5 “A film is made up of a chain of shots.”6
Moreover, cinema is a downright language which has its own syntax and its own codes. The basic
element of this language, the one which in natural languages would be defined as morpheme, is the
The terms ‘cutting’ and ‘splicing’ derive from the fact that, before the digital era, the various shots had to
be cut from the roll film and spliced, in order to edit.
Barsam R, Monahan D. Looking at movies, an introduction to film. 3rd ed. New York: W.W. Norton &
Company; 2010: 320.
2
Translation by the author: “Filmmontage ist eine Sammelbezeichnung für einen komplexen Vorgang, der
den Film in seinem Ablauf strukturiert, seine visuellen und akustischen Elemente auswählt, anordnet und sie
organisiert …”. Beller H. Handbuch der Filmmontage: Praxis und Prinzipien des Filmschnitts. 5th ed. TRVerl.-Union; 2005: 78.
3
Barsam R, Monahan D. Op Cit: 320.
4
Dudley A, Joubert-Laurencin H. Opening Bazin, postwar film theory & its afterlife. New York: Oxford
University Press; 2011: 291.
5
Translation by the author: “Filme bestehen aus Bildern … Das konkrete Filmerlebnis stellt sich als ein
Erleben von zusammenhängenden Bildern bzw. Bildfolgen dar …”. Borstnar N, Pabst E, Wulff HJ.
Einführung in die Film- und Fernsehwissenschaft. 2nd ed. Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft; 2008: 97.
6
Translation by the author: “Ein Film besteht aus einer Kette von Einstellungen.” Hickethier K. Film- und
Fernsehananalyse. 3rd ed. Stuttgart: Metzler; 2001: 52.
3
1
single frame: “The smallest unit of film editing is the cinematic frame on the exposed photographic
film.”7
These small units, in a fast sequence, are assembled by our cognitive system as if they are part of a
whole; this gives us the impression of a moving image. Indeed, cinema might be considered as a
real illusion.
The first remarkable experiments in these terms were conducted by Eadweard Muybridge who,
through the employment of a ‘phenakistoscope’ and a sequence of images of running horses taken
by himself, created the illusion of an animal in movement.8
Two are the principles which permit static images to be seen as motion images.
The first one has been defined in psychology as ‘Phi phenomenon’: “This impression of movement
which is achieved through the gradual presentation of stationary frames is investigated in
perceptual psychology as Phi-phenomenon ... : frames in succession merge in a general impression,
which is more than the sum of its parts.”9 Therefore, a fast succession of static images is perceived
by our cognitive system as a whole and assembled together. This gives us the perception of motion.
As a matter of fact, according to the Czech psychologist Max Wertheimer who discovered the ‘Phi
phenomenon’, this is caused by the tendency of our perception to associate various inputs in
indivisible structures.10
A second phenomenon, not less interesting and fundamental in the production of movement, is the
‘Afterimage phenomenon’. This is an effect in which an image keeps on holding in our visual
perception for a short time, also after the source of light has ceased. “An afterimage is a type
of optical illusion in which an image continues to appear briefly even after exposure to the actual
image has ended.” 11
VIDEO 02: Cinema as illusion
Translation by the author: “Die kleinste Einheit der Filmmontage ist das filmische Einzelbild auf dem
belichteten Filmstreifen.” Beller H. Op Cit: 9.
8
Something similar was developed by Max Skladanowsky in the same period with the ‘Daumenkino’.
9
Translation by the author: “Dieser Bewegungseindruck, der durch die sukzessive Darbietung ruhender
Einzelbilder erzielt wird, wurde in der Wahrnehmungspsychologie als Phi-Phänomen untersucht …:
Aneinandergereihte Einzelbilder verschmelzen zu einem Gesamteindruck, der mehr ist als die Summe seiner
Teile.”. Beller H. Op Cit: 9.
10
Wertheimer M. Experimentelle Studien über das Sehen von Bewegung. Zeitschrift für Psychologie 1912;
1:
161-265.
Available
at
the
following
internet
address:
http://gestalttheory.net/download/Wertheimer1912_Sehen_von_Bewegung.pdf
(consulted
on
26th
December 2013).
11
Cherry K. What is an Afterimage?. About.com Psychology. Available at the following internet address:
http://psychology.about.com/od/sensationandperception/f/afterimages.htm (consulted on 26th December
2013).
4
7
A definite amount of frames makes up the single shot, defined as: “… one uninterrupted run of the
camera … as short or as long as necessary…”.12 In other words: “We name ‘shot’ what, in a film,
is situated between two cuts. This shot is made up of single pictures and, according to the rule
needs, 24 of them per second in a film.”13
The first films were single shot movies; a renowned example is ‘L'Arrivée d'un train en gare de La
Ciotat’ by Lumiere brothers and, as regards to the German cinema, ‘Das Boxende Känguruh’ by
Skladanowsky brothers. In those film there is not, therefore, any kind of editing.
VIDEO 03: The first films
In later films and, more in general, in modern cinema, except from rare circumstance (such as the
Andy Warhol’s films ‘Empire’ and ‘Sleep’, but also in theatrical representations taken by a
camera)14, numerous shots are combined to create longer and more complex units named scenes,
that is: “A complete unit of plot action incorporating one or more shots …”.15 “The scene is
traditionally determined as a unit of space, time, action and people … Therefore, the scene is rather
a content category, which already before the completion of the film represents a cohesive unit
…”.16
The last structural film unit in order of complexity is the ‘sequence’, defined as: “A series of edited
shots characterized by inherent unity of theme and purpose.”17 In other words, the ‘sequence’ is:
“… a piece of film, that is to say an episode, connected graphically, spatially, chronologically,
thematically and/or scenically which forms itself in a self-contained unit.”18
VIDEO 04: Film syntax
12
Barsam R, Monahan D. Op Cit: 210.
Translation by the author: “Das, was sich in einem Film zwischen zwei Schnitten befindet, nennen wir eine
‘Einstellung’. Diese Einstellung setzt sich aus einzelnen Bildern zusammen, wovon in der Regel 24 pro
Sekunde im Kinofilm … benötigt werde.” Hickethier K. Op Cit: 52.
14
Hickethier K. Op Cit: 52.
15
Barsam R, Monahan D. Op Cit: 557.
16
Translation by the author: “Traditionellerweise wird die Szene … als Einheit von Raum, Zeit, Handlung
und Personen bestimmt… Die Szene ist also eher eine inhaltliche Kategorie, die bereits vorfilmisch eine
geschlossene Einheit darstellt…”. Borstnar N, Pabst E, Wulff HJ. Op Cit: 152.
17
Barsam R, Monahan D. Op Cit: 557.
18
Translation by the author: “… ein Stück Film bzw. eine Episode, die grafisch, räumlich, zeitlich,
thematisch und/oder szenisch zusammenhängt und eine relativ autonome, in sich abgeschlossene Einheit
bildet.” Bornstar N, Pabst E, Wulff HJ. Op Cit: 152.
5
13
1.3. KULESHOV EFFECT
One fundamental principle on which the editing is based is the fact that the viewer tends to interpret
the single shot as connected to those immediately preceding or following it.
What usually happens inside a film is that a shot, which follows another one, gives automatically to
the viewer the sensation that it, let’s say shot B, is the consequence of what happened in the first
shot, let’s say shot A, and that both shots are connected by spatial and temporal relations.
VIDEO 05 – The relations between shots
The power of this effect was demonstrated with an experiment by Lev Kuleshov in 1918: in a short
video three different shots (a dish of soup, the body of a child in a coffin and a woman on a sofa)
are followed by the identical close-up of an actor’s expressionless face. The viewers were asked
what they would deduce from the actor’s expression and answered: hunger in regards to the shot
edited with food, tenderness in regards to the shot edited with the child and desire in the shot
followed by the woman on the sofa; while, indeed, the actor’s expression remained the same.19
Kuleshov, with this experiment, taking into consideration the natural attitude of the viewer to create
logical connections between the single shots, wanted to give evidence to the fact that the single shot
takes on meaning as a result of what is showed before. To sum up: “The Kuleshov effect proffers
the principle that, in absence o fan establishing shot, a viewer will infer a spatial relation between
discrete shots. In other words, when presented with a series of shots, viewer assumes or constructs
a relationship of space, time and/or narrative among them.”20
VIDEO 06 – The Kuleshov effect
19
Barsam R, Monahan D. Op Cit: 320.
Several variants of the experiment are present.
20
Wojcik P. Movie acting – The film reader. New York: Routledge; 2004: 4.
6
2.1. EDITING IN PRACTICE
The director, who in a film wants to create specific meanings or who has the purpose to make his
film more enjoyable for the viewer (with, for instance, continuity21), can make use of specific
editing techniques or rules.
Mentioning only some of them, we will refer to ‘180 degree system’, ‘shot-reverse shot’, ‘graphic
match cut’, ‘master shot’, parallel editing and so on.
This term paper does not aim at analyzing all the single techniques,22 but focusing only on one of
them and examining how it is used by the director to produce meaning.
In fact, technique, in the same way as it happens in many arts such as music, dance, painting, should
not be considered as an aim, but on the contrary as a tool. Great artists do not apply technique in a
schematic way, but employ it as an instrument which allows them to communicate ideas, feelings or
thoughts in a flexible and creative way.
2.2. THE POINT OF VIEW EDITING IN
‘DER HIMMEL ÜBER BERLIN’
‘Der Himmel über Berlin’, realized in 1987 by Wim Wenders, is a film which “… has prompted a
torrent of commentary, exegesis and discourses like no other film of Wenders” 23 ranging over many
topics, from commentaries focused on the importance of physicality, to those focused more on
desire and (spiritual) eroticism, to those focused on the historical background, isolation and division
portrayed by Berlin in the film.24
Beyond the single interpretations, which are actually not much relevant to this exposition, we might
start considering the film ‘Der Himmel über Berlin’ as a representation of an angels’ story or, at
least, we might state that angels (with all the consequent correlations, that is to say their thoughts,
meditations, point of views and doubts – because, in this film, also angels ask themselves questions)
are the protagonists of the film25 and take on an important role.
‘Continuity editing’ is the one which allows a fluid passage through the different film shots, in order to
avoid that the viewer notices the ‘cuts’.
22
Whoever is interested in deepening editing techniques can refer to a good manual such as: Reisz K, Millar
G. The technique of film editing. 2nd ed. Burlington: Focal Press; 2010 / Barsam R, Monahan D. Op Cit:
319-66 / Dancyger K. The Technique of Film & Video Editing. 5th ed. Burlington: Focal Press; 2011.
23
Brady M, Leal J. Wim Wenders and Peter Handke: Collaboration, Adaptation, Recomposition.
Amsterdam: Rodopi B.V.; 2011: 243.
24
Kolker RP, Beicken P. The films of Wim Wenders - Cinema as Vision and Desire. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press; 1993: 138-60 / Künzel U. Wim Wenders - Ein Filmbuch. 3rd ed. Freiburg: Dreisam
Verlag; 1989: 199-209 / Cook RF, Gemünden G. The Cinema of Wim Wenders: Image, Narrative, and the
Postmodern Condition. Detroit: Wayne State University Press; 1997: 163-87.
25
Ibid: 167.
7
21
Indeed, the German director Wim Wenders “Sensing the importance of Berlin both as a bridge to
the past and as a pivotal city for peaceful coexistence in the world … arrived at the idea for the
film: angels living in Berlin preserve the memory and even presence of Germany’s history, while
helping the inhabitant bear the burden of their nation’s past.”26And in confirmation of this,
Wenders “… described the mobile camera as embodying the point of view of angels. In this
connection, he told of the production team's efforts to use the camera in such a manner that it
would ‘translate the way angels might see;’ and ‘to seek continually the angel's point of view, the
camera becoming his gaze.”27
Once ascertained that the film represents the city of Berlin through the eyes of angels, it is
interesting to analyse how the German director has called on editing techniques, and more in detail
how Wim Wenders has drawn on ‘point of view editing’ to represent the angels’ gaze.
The ‘point of view editing’28 is a technique which permits to give continuity to the editing,
connecting two or more shots. It consists in presenting a character who is watching something or
somebody and then, in the following shot, in showing what is watched by his/her eyes: “… point of
view editing is used to cut from shot A (a point-of-view shot, with the character looking toward
something offscreen) directly to shot B (… what the character is looking at). Point of view editing is
editing of subjective shots that show a scene exactly the way the character sees it…”29
However, it is not rare to find reverse patterns where it is shown, at the beginning, what is watched
by the character and, only after, the character him/herself watching.
In some cases, the character is not even displayed, but it is shown only what he/she is watching; in
these situations, the fact that we are dealing with ‘point of view’ is deduced by other details.
Moreover, it is important to avoid confusion between ‘POV editing’ and ‘eyeline match’. These two
techniques are similar but, as claimed by two important cinema experts (i.e. Barsam R. and
Monahan D.30), they differ one from the other: “… be careful not to confuse point-of-view editing
with, say, the eye-line match cut, which joins two comparatively objective shots, made perhaps by
an omniscient camera.”31
VIDEO 07: Point of view editing
26
Ibid: 164.
Raskin R. Camera Movement in the Dying Man Scene in Wings of Desire. A Danish Journal of Film
Studies. 1999 Dec; 8: 157. Available at the following internet address: http://pov.imv.au.dk/pdf/pov8.pdf
(consulted on 1st February 2014).
28
From now on we will mainly refer to ‘point of view editing’ with the acronym ‘POV editing’.
29
Barsam R, Monahan D. Op Cit: 347.
30
Ibid: 344.
31
Ibid: 347.
8
27
The film by Win Wenders is rich of ‘POV editing’ in which the character is immediately followed
by what he sees. A classic example is present in the scene when Damiel decides to go to the concert
of ‘Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds’. In three shots we can see Damiel who walks and passes in front
of a poster of the concert, stops, watches in its direction and in the following shot it is shown
exactly what he watches with his eyes. Certainly there are numerous other examples in the course of
the film.
On the other hand, in the scene with the motorcyclist incident the ‘POV editing’ works differently;
the character, in this case, is shown only after what is watched by him. “We see through the eyes of
someone gliding rapidly across a bridge…”,32 we might say through the eyes of Damiel who, at the
end of the shot, watches towards the dying motorcyclist. In the following shot, the angel is shown
with his face in direction of the man with an angle approximately similar to the one of the gaze in
the previous shot. Another example, maybe more clear, is situated in a scene in the camping van
where it is displayed what Damiel watches and, after that, the angel himself.
VIDEO 08: The ‘POV editing’ in ‘Der Himmel über Berlin’
A really interesting case can be observed in the sequence in the library. In a precise shot is
employed the ‘POV editing’ which shows us what the character sees but not the character anymore.
However, despite the fact that the viewer does not directly see the character, it is easy for him/her to
assume that we are dealing with an angel: “ … the first library scene begins with the camera aimed
at the ceiling and slowly tilting downward as it is lowered. The camera then glides horizontally past
people reading at tables, and when it passes a woman in an overcoat with her hand resting on the
shoulder of someone reading, the woman in the coat turns and nods a greeting toward the camera
… The woman's nod toward the camera tells us simultaneously that we are seeing through the eyes
of an angel and that she herself must also be one.”33 Something similar takes place in the next shot.
Not less noteworthy is the scene in which Columbo feels the presence of Damiel in front of a street
trader. In this case, Columbo is firstly shown and after him there is a shot which, at first glance,
seems to be a ‘POV editing’, that is what Columbo sees (i.e. the angel Damiel). However, no ‘POV
editing’ is in question in this example, since Columbo (and the scene itself) confirms that, although
he feels this presence, he cannot see him. Therefore, it is not reasonable to declare something
Columbo cannot see as his point of view, and we are more likely dealing with an omniscient camera
(and thus viewer).
VIDEO 09: ‘POV editing’ and some interesting cases in the film ‘Der Himmel über Berlin’
32
33
Raskin R. Op Cit: 160.
Ibid: 157-8.
9
On the other hand, describing the scene where a dialogue between Damiel and Columbo takes place
(during the shooting of the Nazi film) we will refer to the employment of ‘eyeline match’
(contained in a shot-reverse shot) instead than ‘POV editing’. Although it is shown what the
character watches, in this case this is not displayed through his eyes, but through the use of an
omniscient camera and a point of view external to the embodied characters.
Furthermore, there are still some borderline cases. For instance, in the scene where Damiel sets off
to the concert and stops in front of a television is not clear which one of the two techniques is
employed. At any rate, analyzing the scene more carefully, both techniques can be excluded since
the three televisions shown in the three shots are all different.
VIDEO 10: ‘Point of view editing’ and ‘eyeline match’
The director’s choice to depict the point of view of angels through the ‘POV editing’, hence, turns
to be interesting both for narrative purposes (What do the angels watch and think? How it is their
relationships with the mankind? What doubts and uncertainties do they have? – in Wenders’ film
even angels ask themselves existential questions!) and for technical ones (employment of black and
white, editing choices, camera movements etc.).
In terms of narration, for instance, it seems clear that the elements and facts of reality which are
worth to be shown in the film are determined by the angels and they are mostly depicted through
their point of view.
Not less interesting is the fact that the ‘POV editing’ allows the viewer to understand that what is
seen by him/her can be attributed to the angels’ gaze (during these shots angels are not noticed by
human beings, moreover, they stay next to people without being watched) and that the only ones
able to see them are children: “The initial shot/reverse-shot sequence occurs with Damiel, complete
with wings, standing on the tower of the Gedächtniskirche. From his perspective we see a young
girl below who has stopped in the middle of the crowded crosswalk and is looking up at him while
the adults go about their business without seeing him. This shot and the subsequent ones of the two
girls on the bus and the child on the airplane establish that the protagonist is invisible except to
children and angels.”34 Also further scenes confirm this perspective.
Furthermore, the reassuring way with which the children look to the angels’ gaze reveals to the
viewer further information about the angels themselves, namely their positive influence on the
surroundings, and thus conveys a sensation of calm and peace to the viewer: “The unthreatened and
nonthreatening looks the children direct at the angels, many of them directly into the camera,
mirror the benevolence in the look of the angels.”35
VIDEO 11: ‘Point of view editing’ and narration
34
35
Cook RF, Gemünden G. Op Cit: 168.
Ibid: 168.
10
Finally, the director’s choice to show the viewer what angels see portrays an interesting and
noteworthy factor also from a technical perspective. Indeed: “Locating the camera as the eye of an
angel presented constant challenges during the shooting and resulted in innovative solutions,
particularly in terms of the camera movement, which was to give the illusion of unlimited movement
through space and time.”36
This feeling of boundless and free movement is already found in the first scenes, where the city of
Berlin is shown from above, probably from the eyes of an angel: “From an all seeing eye, a
dissolve takes us on a flight around the Himmel über Berlin … and in and out of the lives and minds
of people. This bird's-eye view lets us hear and see everything from an angel's-eye-view.”37A
similar scene is present again some minutes later in the film.
The technical challenge to portray the angels’ point of view is even more noticeable in the scene
where Cassiel jumps from the Victoria Statue and in which shots from the cities are shown: “The
most spectacular example of camera movement as angelic point of view in this film, is undoubtedly
the montage sequence … , which is introduced by a shot in which Cassiel punge from the wing of
the Victory Statue … , after which the camera takes a similar plunge … and we see – through
Cassiel's eyes –and in dizzying succession, a cascade of fragmentary urban images, some of which
are quite disturbing.”38
VIDEO 12: ‘Point of view editing’ from a technical perspective
36
Ibid: 167-8.
Raskin R. Op Cit: 104-5.
38
Ibid: 158.
37
11
CONCLUSIONS
The starting assumption, whereby the employment of editing allows to convey meanings and to
manipulate these according to the director’s taste, has been largely confirmed.
We have actually seen how the viewer already tends to see more than what is really projected on the
screen, how this phenomenon has already been investigated in psychology and how it permits the
illusion of cinema.
Moreover, we have described how the viewer is inclined to correlate the single shots one another
and how this allows him/her to give the single shot new meanings. We have had a further
confirmation of this principle through the analysis of the ‘Kuleshov effect’.
In addition, we have referred to the practical use of a specific editing technique, i.e. the ‘point of
view editing’. It has been shown how, in this case too, the viewer spontaneously links two shots
together and how this fact is exploited by the director (also in an artistic way) to represent and show
the point of view of the film characters.
Finally, this term paper has dealt with some particular cases of ‘point of view editing’ showing how
in some circumstances the standard pattern of this technique can be reversed and how the character
might even not be present after his/her point of view shot.
To sum up, this work has tried and tries to be a good starting point for those who want to deepen the
editing topic. For the cineaste (but also for the ordinary man), editing itself and its knowledge is
necessary to a better understanding of the world of cinema and, why not, to set out for the
realization of a film.
12
BIBLIOGRAPHY












Barsam R, Monahan D. Looking at movies, an introduction to film. 3rd ed. New York:
W.W. Norton & Company; 2010.
Beller H. Handbuch der Filmmontage: Praxis und Prinzipien des Filmschnitts. 5th ed. TRVerl.-Union; 2005.
Borstnar N, Pabst E, Wulff HJ. Einführung in die Film- und Fernsehwissenschaft. 2nd ed.
Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft; 2008.
Brady M, Leal J. Wim Wenders and Peter Handke: Collaboration, Adaptation,
Recomposition. Amsterdam: Rodopi B.V.; 2011.
Cook RF, Gemünden G. The Cinema of Wim Wenders: Image, Narrative, and the
Postmodern Condition. Detroit: Wayne State University Press; 1997.
Dancyger K. The Technique of Film & Video Editing. 5th ed. Burlington: Focal Press;
2011.
Dudley A, Joubert-Laurencin H. Opening Bazin, postwar film theory & its afterlife. New
York: Oxford University Press; 2011.
Hickethier K. Film- und Fernsehananalyse. 3rd ed. Stuttgart: Metzler; 2001.
Kolker RP, Beicken P. The films of Wim Wenders - Cinema as Vision and Desire.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1993.
Künzel U. Wim Wenders - Ein Filmbuch. 3rd ed. Freiburg: Dreisam Verlag; 1989: 199-209
Reisz K, Millar G. The technique of film editing. 2nd ed. Burlington: Focal Press; 2010
Wojcik P. Movie acting – The film reader. New York: Routledge; 2004: 4.
SITOGRAPHY



Cherry
K.
What
is
an
Afterimage?
About.com
Psychology.
http://psychology.about.com/od/sensationandperception/f/afterimages.htm (consulted on
26th December 2013).
Raskin R. Camera Movement in the Dying Man Scene in Wings of Desire. A Danish
Journal of Film Studies. 1999 Dec. http://pov.imv.au.dk/pdf/pov8.pdf (consulted on 1st
February 2014).
Wertheimer M. Experimentelle Studien über das Sehen von Bewegung. Zeitschrift für
Psychologie
1912;
1:
161-265.
http://gestalttheory.net/download/Wertheimer1912_Sehen_von_Bewegung.pdf (consulted
on 26th December 2013).
13
View publication stats