In Maya Deren’s piece entitled, “Cinematography: the creative use of reality” the author discusses the importance of editing by saying, “the editing of a film creates the sequential relationship which gives particular or new meaning to images according to their function” (Deren 153). This concept of using unique editing to bring new meaning to a film is a theme that’s evident throughout the course of Run Lola Run and allows the filmmaker to create a non-linear story that explores the idea that each of us has a fate that can be changed by something as simple as bumping into a woman or arrive late to a bank. One editing element the director used that I found interest was the cuts between Lola’s interactions with people around her and then the projected fate of those she interacted with. This sequence used quick cuts and a screen that says “And then…” to create a visual striking shot that also seconds as a creative way to show the potential futures that the characters Lola interacts with could have if one minor part of their day was adjusted. I think that a shot like this really embodies Deren’s point about the importance of editing because without these sequences it would be incredibly difficult to illustrate the idea that every choice we make has a consequence that can change the course of ones life. By choosing to edit the film in such a way that fragments of the future are revealed through flashes the filmmaker gives new meaning to Lola’s every action and stresses this idea that the choices we make have a ripple effect on those around us.

In 1916, Hugo Munsterberg scoffed at the idea of sound being a part of cinema:

Last class some of us scoffed at the idea of 3D films, declaring that they would never be a form of film worth viewing. Looking at how off the mark Munsterberg was in regards to sound in film, I wonder if the claim that 3D cinema distracts from the true intentions of cinematic endeavors will remain true into the future..?

From the early 1900s, when sound was just making its way into cinema, to the scores written for films of the Classical Hollywood era, to the present day, the use of sound has changed in innumerable ways. As Gorbman outlines in Critical Visions, sound of the Hollywood era was meant to set the mood- not dictate it, to be inaudible, and invisible. Just as directors like Maya Deren, Truffaut, and Twyker have bent the rules of formalism in filmmaking, the formalistic guidelines for sound in film have been broken since the Classical Hollywood era as well. Sound no longer remains in the background, but is often used as a device to break the fourth wall. As I mentioned in class, the use of sound to break the fourth wall is executed by P.T. Anderson in his film Magnolia (1999) as can be seen in this clip:

The music used in film, which in Classical Hollywood was typically an orchestral score, is now often synonymous with films of recent years. When I think of Toy Story, I can’t help but think of Randy Newman’s “You’ve Got a Friend in Me”. Jerry Maguire? – Tom Petty’s “Free Fallin'”, which, as can be seen in this clip, also serves as a sound bridge between two scenes, and is used as both diegetic and non-diegetic sound.

Munsterberg could not have predicted how sound could would used in films since his era, nor can we predict how it will be used in the future. Hopefully we can learn from Munsterberg’s miscalculation, and appreciate the ability of film to be molded and shaped in ways that we cannot fathom in the present.

Tykwer’s 1998 film Run Lola Run was a very enjoyable and useful film for us to watch.  There were many elements from the readings and discussion that came into play with the film and it was also a fun experience. The film uses editing very effectively to show many different things. The very fast cuts of Lola and Manni and the phone, the quick frames of the futures of the people Lola interacts This type of editing added to the rising suspense of each time Lola would run to Manni, which contrasts with the final moments of each “run” which were in slow motion. I enjoyed reading about the film in Understanding Film Theory as well, this provided more insight into the film. For example how the 180 degree line was consistently broken to make us feel somewhat lost while we followed her through the city. Editing techniques like this greatly added to the films overall feel.

There were a few other ideas in the film that I found interesting, I brought one up in class, which was the very beginning in which we saw the security guard and he said something along the lines of “90 minutes each time, the rest is just theory.” I am still confused as to why he said this, and why they chose the security guard to say this. Toby brought up something that I had noticed too, in which the first scene were we see the father and his lover the quality of the footage diminishes greatly, almost as if we are watching a soap opera, which could be what the director was going for. Another thing we touched on was the idea of Run Lola Run being a fairy tale, how her scream and touch have powers, and I never thought of this before, I had seen the film before but did not make this connection, I see this now and can notice the relations between the film and Propp’s hero theory.

I also enjoyed the use of animation in the film, I do not know why it was chosen, (the stair case, intro, and when the father comes out as animation briefly) but I enjoyed it, a creative touch to an already creative film.

Nick Tassoni

For those of you not familiar with Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, it’s a 2010 film starring Michael Cera, based on a series of comics by the same title. The plot is boy meets girl plus the hero’s journey, with a healthy amount of comedy about music and nerd culture mixed in.

On to my point, though, Scott Pilgrim uses a lot of comic book-style animation and a lot of editing techniques that reflect those of Run Lola Run. More specifically, the use of an eye-level closeup on Lola’s face while she thinks about who can help her and the phone falls slowly to the receiver. I can see in my mind’s eye a very similar montage occurring in Scott Pilgrim, when Scott needs to think fast to get out of a bad situation, and punctuated by something like the phone hitting the receiver, or a piece of trash being tossed behind him to land in a garbage can perfectly.

The use of animation when Lola runs down the stairs and in the opening credits also seems to have inspired Scott Pilgrim. Every time Scott’s love interest Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) has a flashback or explains something about about a person from her past, the film shows textless comic book panels, with her narrating. They were stills, rather than animated, but that still seems to have pulled from Lola with the flashforward clips of people that Lola bumps into.

Scott Pilgrim also makes a lot of similar choices with editing and framing. Shots at weird angles, time dilation to increase suspense, time compression to get to the action, lots of fast cuts during more intense scenes with high-tempo music, etc.

It was not received nearly as well as Lola, but it certainly seems to run in the same vein. It was just a comparison that I couldn’t help making as I watched.

In Understanding Film Theory, the author writes about Run, Lola, Run (1998) in the context of placing all of the characters in an archetype/spheres of actions list. The list was composed of 7 characters who felt into the categories accordingly:

1. The Hero: (the character who seeks something)
   LOLA
2. The Villain: (opposes or actively blocks the hero’s quest)
   DRUG-DEALING BOSS
3. The Donor: (provides an object w/ magical properties)
   LOLA *has magical/supernatural powers-shattering glass, healing man from heart attack*
4. The Dispatcher: (ends the hero on their quest) MANNI
5. The False Hero: (Disrupts the Hero’s success by making false claims) Everyone who gets in her way?
6. The Helper: (Assists and rescues the hero) MANNI/Man in ambulance who gives her a ride to where she needs to go.
7. The princess/the father

These categories were helpful to see, although they don’t necessarily fit hand-in-hand with the film completely, but it was a nice skeleton to see on the relation of the characters in comparison to the hero, who in this case was Lola. The characters are far more complex than the traits they are given above, but they come to be complex with the help of plot and climax. For Lola, she is complicated by her connections to Manni, Her Dad and even the security guard at the bank. In addition to this, when the writer mentions that she has supernatural powers, I quite didn’t see it much as her powers, I saw it more as an editing technique used by the director in order to create a surprise or connection between the three chunks of footage.

The form of the film was done very well and it was nice to see how the changes impacted everyone’s life, not just lola’s. In addition to form,  Tykwer included many different visual effects (also mentioned in understanding film theory) that moved along the illusion of time and space. As well as the visual effects there was also the inclusion of music that created a fast paced atmosphere which we were fully engaged with because of its connection to the scenes.

Overall, the connections of form, sound and editing brought this film together to a place where the form made the film what it is. As said in Chapter 3, “Form is privileged over content”

When watching Run, Lola, Run (1998) in class on Wednesday I was very interested in the overlapping of the characters, the contrasts and the connections; especially by its construction and edits. While watching the film I took notes on the things that changed every time the scene began again. (I’m pretty sure it was obvious to all who watch this film, but I thought it was well done.)

The central character, Lola, is constantly on a run in order to save her boyfriend’s life from his Drug-dealing boss. But while she runs she interacts with many different characters, who at the time seem meaningless and trivial because we are all focused on the bigger picture: her getting the money in time to save her boyfriend. The whole concept of this made me think about the reality of life that Tykwer achieves because as we go on day by day we don’t realize those who surround us. We are all on a mission and its very easy to make it about us and forget about the world around us.

For instance, towards the first chunk of the film, Lola is just focused on one thing: running as fast as she can to save her boyfriend (Manni) and while she does so, her interactions with people seem careless and not important. But there is a big contrast from the first chunk and last two chunks, such that she is aware of the lady in her way, so she moves, aware that holding the gun while she escapes the bank she just robbed probably isn’t a good idea, so she chucks it. Overall, the additions and changes to the chunks, prove how life works. By this I mean, everything happens for a reason and this case its fate. Everything that is meant to happen, will happen.

Apart from this metaphor for life, the film was one of my favorites I have seen while studying film because it was a combination of things that we have read about like the concept of music in a film, editing, composing a frame, mise-en-scene, etc. All these aspects are what make a film relevant and purposeful because if they didn’t we wouldn’t watch them.

I found that Run Lola Run made great use of Maya Deren’s point about the reversion of time and how, if the technique is used within a film, it is most generally meant to undue time.  Run Lola Run took that concept and really ran with it.  As demonstrated by the multiple playthroughs of events, it felt as if Lola was a video character who was being reset until the best outcome occurred.  I felt that it was also a great film to demonstrate the idea of learning from your mistakes as seen by how Lola slowly corrects herself through trial and error, albeit supernaturally.

We see that these corrections also have positive affects for other people as well.  We see that her father ultimately decides that the best option is to put off talking about the baby with his mistress instead of completely abandoning his family altogether.  The woman with the carriage eventually turns from being a person who steals children to a woman who finds religion, becoming a child of a being that is greater than her; becoming one who steals to one who is found.  We see that the woman who works at the banks goes from ending her life to starting a new one with the bank clerk.  These are examples of how chaos theory is also weaved into the film via butterfly affect.  Despite Lola’s father being injured in the car crash with Ronnie, no one left the final run-through any worse than they did initially, highlighting the fact that Lola’s presence may have some magical control over how time mechanisms work.  I found that due to the short time frame of the runs, it was incredible how just small moments of interaction could send ripples through the timestream.

To note however, the music never quite changes from run to run.  It is the same techno beat used each time with slight variances in the soundtrack as she visits different places each run.  The three key places she visits that are different each run are the Grocery Store, the Bank, and then the Casino.  Each having their own symbolic variances as well.  The grocery store is the cheapest place to find the 100,000 marks, the Bank the most wealthy place, and the Casino the most probable place.  What sets the Casino above the Bank in terms of affluence is that at the Bank, one can only withdraw however much money that have there whereas at the Casino, the men and women there most likely each had enough to replace the 100,000 marks, and they were just gambling it away, thus making it the best choice Lola could have corrected.

What commentary Tykwer is making about the correction of time and the legal robbing of the rich via Gambling is amiss to me, but, there is something there, I just need to run it through my mind a few more times until I can find out what it is…

I know a few others have pointed out the Lola similarities to Vertigo, but I’ll jump on the bandwagon. Firstly, I loved the movie. It was clearly created by a team of artists who love film. The structure, screenplay, editing, direction, music and acting were all so unique and different that I think this film belongs in the category for timeless, culturally important foreign films – it was excellent.

The vertigo references were often times blatant (on purpose) which was great. The spiral spinning behind Manni in the phone booth. The never ending spiral staircase. The credits with Lola running into the spiraling dimension warp. The painting in the casino. Tykwer, the director, took so many different film practices and stuck them together with a twist. I thought it worked beautifully. One thing that I always ask myself when I watch a film is, “What the hell happened to that side character we met for a minute? ” I really liked the Tykwer did the camera motif and showed all these butterfly affect scenarios. Motifs are an excellent way to end a film – it leaves the audience smiling. I also though that the pacing of the film was excellent. Another film that practices the “What if” scenarios is Sliding Doors, but Lola was much quicker and to the point. It was like a cooler version of speed with all these different scenarios. Plus, the subtle hints that Lola was knowledgeable of her previous attempts was very intriguing. Almost God-like. There is a film called Source Code with Jake Gyllenhaal which goes through replays of scenarios or the recent Edge of Tomorrow which tackles the ground hog day approach and it works really well.

Philosophically, the film really addresses the theory of compatibilism  which offers that we can live with free will and determinism simultaneously without being illogical. The film starts with the security guard asking us to address these questions. Can we be liberated and make our own choices or are we stuck accepting a predetermined fate?

All in all, the movie is nothing short of brilliant. You can watch it and just have fun with it or you can watch it and dig into deep philosophical questions that will take you down a day long rabbit hole of questions. Not to mention the wild editing choices and directorial design. Awesome movie. Kuleshov would be very proud.

One scene that stood out to me was in the casino.  As Lola is cashing out, the camera view pans to the throng of people watching her, continues past them, landing on the roulette wheel, and moving up to the clock. In between the roulette wheel and the clock, there is a painting of the back of a woman and her spiral of hair.  Though the painting is on the screen for a minute or less, I totally noticed the comparison between this painting and Madeleine looking at a painting of Carlotta in vertigo in Vertigo. (I literally wrote in my notes: “painting in casino reminiscent of Vertigo)

After I noticed this direct reference to Vertigo, I began to think of other comparisons between the two films. Spirals and spinning are motifs that are directly represented in these two films. Important scenes in each film involve characters running up/down spiral stair cases, filled with fear/anxiety.

Each film also focuses on the idea that different realities might exist, and how things may have been different had we done something differently.  In both Run Lola Run and Vertigo, the main characters, Lola and Scottie, respectively, are given some sort of a chance to do things differently. Lola literally replays the same 20 minutes, and receives  more favorable outcomes, while Scottie has a chance to redo his relationship with Madeleine, now Judy, yet he attempts to turn her back into Madeleine.

I need a little bit more time to truly contemplate all that I watched (this movie was very dense) but overall, I found it to be an enjoyable movie to watch, and it seems like every detail (editing, mis-en-scene) had a purpose.