Continuity style and the invisible cut

I guess it's safe to say that Hollywood owes its global dominance to the emergence and mastering of the continuity style. Its huge studios overcame the complexity needed to re-create partial "facsimiles"of the world (quite early, Griffith even used the word in some slides in The Birth of a Nation), but these patches had to be stitched together according to strict rules in order to work, so a premium was put on editing for the continuous re-construction of a disassembled reality: if it's all fake, we might as well trick you into believing it by the coherence of the dramatic flow. Check out the linked video to hear how highly contemporary, grade-A Hollywood editors rate the importance of the invisible cut when they talk about the core of their craft. Don't get me wrong, I love to create and to watch the illusion of continuity, and much reflexive, "meta" editing with room for repetition or unexpected ellipsis is either lazy or awkward and usually dampens the emotion. I mean I'm all for great flow. But aren't arch, story, substance, character and emotion actually more relevant to an editor's craft? Yes, the mind-controlling, pre-intellectual techniques so dear to mainstream Hollywood are there to be used. But still. Editing is scriptwriting, it's sacking bad acting, it's creating narrative parallels. It is narrative. 2015's Oscar for editing to Whiplash was a safe bet. Still, there's so much more than the awesome metric editing expected from a film about a drum player.