<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Two for the Road</title>
	<atom:link href="http://filmfemme.com/2007/07/26/two-for-the-road/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://filmfemme.com/2007/07/26/two-for-the-road/</link>
	<description>Movie Reviews, etc.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Jun 2010 01:34:45 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: FilmFemme &#187; We Don&#8217;t Live Here Anymore</title>
		<link>http://filmfemme.com/2007/07/26/two-for-the-road/comment-page-1/#comment-97</link>
		<dc:creator>FilmFemme &#187; We Don&#8217;t Live Here Anymore</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:15:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filmfemme.com/?p=12#comment-97</guid>
		<description>[...] is my second deterioration-of-a-marriage movie in as many days. I didn&#8217;t like it as much as Two for the Road but it was [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is my second deterioration-of-a-marriage movie in as many days. I didn&#8217;t like it as much as Two for the Road but it was [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FilmFemme</title>
		<link>http://filmfemme.com/2007/07/26/two-for-the-road/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>FilmFemme</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:46:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filmfemme.com/?p=12#comment-8</guid>
		<description>@ anon: Hey! Someone&#039;s reading my blog!  Cool!  Who are you?  

I&#039;d like to point out that the movie is from 1967 so the argument that this is an &#039;early film&#039; doesn&#039;t really hold (it most certainly was not considered a &quot;new medium&quot; in 1967).  Crosscutting and nonlinear editing was actually first explored by early filmmakers, like D.W. Griffith in the early 1900s.  Before the advent of sound in the movies, they were forced to use creative editing with little explanation to move plots along at the clip that audiences expected.

1967 pretty much falls in the post-war/modern period where filmmakers like Donen again started to experiment with nonlinear story lines as a backlash to rigid pre-war, classical Hollywood styles.

Anyway, there&#039;s a little film history lesson for today!  That was totally worth $40k a year.

Seriously, how did you find my blog?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ anon: Hey! Someone&#8217;s reading my blog!  Cool!  Who are you?  </p>
<p>I&#8217;d like to point out that the movie is from 1967 so the argument that this is an &#8216;early film&#8217; doesn&#8217;t really hold (it most certainly was not considered a &#8220;new medium&#8221; in 1967).  Crosscutting and nonlinear editing was actually first explored by early filmmakers, like D.W. Griffith in the early 1900s.  Before the advent of sound in the movies, they were forced to use creative editing with little explanation to move plots along at the clip that audiences expected.</p>
<p>1967 pretty much falls in the post-war/modern period where filmmakers like Donen again started to experiment with nonlinear story lines as a backlash to rigid pre-war, classical Hollywood styles.</p>
<p>Anyway, there&#8217;s a little film history lesson for today!  That was totally worth $40k a year.</p>
<p>Seriously, how did you find my blog?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: anon</title>
		<link>http://filmfemme.com/2007/07/26/two-for-the-road/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>anon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 22:08:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filmfemme.com/?p=12#comment-7</guid>
		<description>early films not only avoided non-linearity, but they even avoided cuts as much as possible.  the thought was, at the time, that the audience would become confused: &quot;what?  where did that guy come from?  we were just looking at that other guy!  where&#039;d he go?  what happened?&quot;  it was a new medium, and the only experience that directors had at that time was with plays, and they just didn&#039;t know how audiences would interpret it all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>early films not only avoided non-linearity, but they even avoided cuts as much as possible.  the thought was, at the time, that the audience would become confused: &#8220;what?  where did that guy come from?  we were just looking at that other guy!  where&#8217;d he go?  what happened?&#8221;  it was a new medium, and the only experience that directors had at that time was with plays, and they just didn&#8217;t know how audiences would interpret it all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
