Enhanced descriptions from Syndetics:

There are many books on the technical aspects of film and video editing. Much rarer are books on how editors think and make creative decisions.

Filled with timeless principles and thought-provoking examples from a variety of international films, the second edition of Karen Pearlman's Cutting Rhythms offers an in-depth study of the film editor's rhythmic creativity and intuition, the processes and tools editors use to shape rhythms, and how rhythm works to engage audiences in film. While respecting the importance of intuitive flow in the cutting room, this book offers processes for understanding what editing intuition is and how to develop it. This fully revised and updated edition contains:

New chapters on collaboration and "editing thinking"; Advice on making onscreen drafts before finalizing your story Tips on how to create and sustain audience empathy and engagement; Explanations of how rhythm is perceived, learned, practiced and applied in editing; Updated discussions of intuition, structure and dynamics; An all-new companion website (www.focalpress.com/cw/pearlman) with video examples and links for expanding and illustrating the principles of key chapters in the book.

Reviews provided by Syndetics

CHOICE Review

First published in 2009, Cutting Rhythms is a book that, in this reviewer's opinion, should have been left on the cutting room floor or, more accurately, left in its original dissertation form in the library. Pearlman (Macquarie Univ., Australia) devotes the first ten (of a dozen) chapters to rehashing her doctoral dissertation, justifying her theories about the "art" and psychology of rhythmic editing. It is unforgivable that throughout these chapters, she ignores the importance of the scriptwriter, director, and cinematographer in forming a cogent story; she brings them in in chapter 11 but then dismisses their importance with the following statement: "Their [editors'] intuitions for this particular part of the process, shaping the flow of movement, are sharper, more specialist, more honed than anyone else's, even the director's." Most of the writers, directors, and cinematographers whose works she analyses in chapters 7-10 would likely disagree. Nor are they likely to agree with Pearlman's use of the analogy "Vulcan mind meld" to describe the relationship between the director and editor. Those interested in film editing should stay away from this book. Summing Up: Not recommended. --James M. King, University of Georgia