{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02597938144329897, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0004123711340206186, 'mean_word_length': 4.975369458128079, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Cinema of the Interstice: Jean-Luc Godard's Prénom Carmen and the Power of Montage

Throughout the history of cinema, the rise of a new idea has always accompanied a challenge to redefine the methods that prevailed in the previous mode of filmmaking. Early American cinema (e.g., Blaché, Porter and Griffith) was able to pave the way for an organic presentation of narrative by innovative camerawork and editing techniques from the earliest stage of cinema. Sergei Eisenstein advocated dialectical montage while criticizing directly what Griffith accomplished with parallel editing and close-up. The Italian neo-realist group (e.g., De Sica and Rossellini) approached cinema as a transparent window to the ordinary world, and in doing so, they avoided the conventional mise-en-scène of their predecessors. The French nouvelle vague group challenged traditional camerawork by bringing the hand-held camera to the street, and thereby tried to break with the illusion of reality in traditional realism. All these efforts to change cinema illustrate precisely how a new idea interrogates and redefines the existing methods within a new context. This methodological challenge also becomes a crucial issue in the discussion of how montage can play its challenging role to destabilize the previous mode of organic unity and create a different type of time-event during a time of critical change in cinema. As Gilles Deleuze noted for the comparison, the montage of movement-image is featured by its power to associate one image with another in a seamless chain, while the montage of time-image interrupts that chain of images, generating an indeterminable gap in the relationship between images (and between image and sound). This disjunctive and non-organic power of montage is a prominent feature of what Deleuze characterizes as “modern cinema.”1 Among many film directors of this category, Jean-Luc Godard is the main focus of Deleuze’s argument for the new type of montage. As Michael Witt pointed out, Deleuze’s “method of the BETWEEN” (or “method of AND”) is deemed almost identical to the montage method that Godard has been using through his entire work. Eisenstein’s method of montage delineates various aesthetic features in his films: the organic unity of a film structure, the effect of pathos in the audience, and the identity of image and thought. Among these features, the organic unity, expressed in the form of