Beauty, when it manifests itself in cinematography, lies not in
the story itself, which could quite easily be recounted in prose
and still less in the ideas which this story may evoke; nor indeed
does it lie in the tics, mannerisms and devices that serve to identify
a director, for their influence is no more decisive than that
of a writer’s favourite words. What matters is the selection of
episodes to be represented and, in each one, the choice of shots
that will be featured in the film, the length of time allotted to
these elements, the order in which they are to be presented, the
sound or words with which they are or are not to be accompanied.
Taken together, all these factors contribute to form a
particular overall cinematographical rhythm. When cinema has
become a longer-established facet of our experience, we will be
able to devise a sort of logic, grammar, or stylistics, of the
cinema which will tell us – on the basis of our knowledge of
existing works – the precise weight to accord to each element in
a typical structural grouping, in order that it can take its place
there harmoniously. But as is the case with all such rule-books
where art is concerned, it could only ever serve to make explicit
the relationships which already exist in successful completed
art and the world of perception works and to inspire other reasonable attempts.

Merleau-Ponty, World of Perception p.98