It’s not novel for me to be on here moaning about the limitations of modern-day film making, particularly with regard to the efforts of our American cousins. There’s a lot to dislike; cliché ridden dialogue and scenes, an obsession with superheroes, prequels, sequels and ‘re-imaginings’, and worst all, incessant wokery.
To this list I’ll add the penchant for that incredibly annoying technique referred to as ‘fast cut’ editing, where many shots of short duration are piled one on top of another in rapid succession, presumably in an attempt to inject pace or excitement into the film at a given point.
I was confronted by the perfect example of this infuriating trope when the wife and I sat down a couple of nights ago to watch ‘Jason Bourne’. We came to the inevitable car chase sequence (a cliché in itself these days), with the inevitable attempt by the production team to try to outdo all such previous ‘smash ’em up’ efforts.
So what did we actually get? You guessed it. Hundreds of short little takes rammed jarringly together, throwing the viewer around the action in dizzying fashion. Chuck in the inevitable shaky camera and CGI for good effect, and you’re left with a confusing, disorientating, frustrating mess;
As a further evidence to support my case, I offer the undernoted classic by way of contrast. Look at how the director starts things off slowly, with the protagonists prowling around each other like a couple of sparring Siamese fighting fish. Then, aided by a some superb scoring, he shifts through the gears, gradually building the pace and tension to a superb denouement. No fast edit (and no shaky camera or CGI), just superb film-making technique;
M’luds, the prosecution contends that ‘fast edit’ is shit, and rests its case .
Nominated by: Ron Knee



