I can’t embed this short film & I respect that – youtube & even vimeo have their limits in terms of the quality of streaming videos, so go watch it here as a quicktime video…. its definitely worth your time – beautifully conceived & shot! Heres two stills I grabbed:
Everyone knows piracy is an issue, and the worst kind of piracy has to be the leak. There is no greater insult to an artist than for their work to be stolen & released to the world before it is finished, and while piracy of a finished product has a negative financial impact, piracy of an unfinished product has far deeper ramifications. What prompted this post? Well, I was reading an article about the picture editorial workflow on the new Star Trek film and while it is an interesting read, one section totally stunned me, get this:
Another issue was steps taken to reduce the risk of the film being pirated.
“Security-wise we made sure all the footage we gave out to the music or sound effects guys were in black-and-white. Eventually we did give them color but it was just another security precaution to make sure things weren’t going to get out. Of course all the footage had massive block letters with the name of who it was going out to. And it wasn’t just on the top and bottom it was through the entire image. Otherwise you just crop the top and bottom.
We had a lot of ADR sessions and some of those were done internationally because some of the actors were overseas. For those we were extremely cautious with and we actually blacked out the entire screen and made a little circle around the actors face and tracked the circle to their face so that is the only thing that was being seen. It’s a little scary when you are dealing with another country, another company and department that you have never met doing the recording. So it was a lot of tedious work involved but you do feel better about sending it out.”
Good grief! So THAT is the creative cost of piracy. To try & prevent the possibility of a leak, the sound post team are required to work to BLACK & WHITE video??? And the actors doing ADR are expected to get back in character, engage with the story & create evocative performances while looking at DISEMBODIED FACES???? In closeup that would seem a little weird but in a wideshot it must be bizzare!
While I feel sorry for the people working in such circumstances, I feel total disgust for the people who create this situation by pirating & leaking original artworks. What exactly is the motive for leaking something? What possible benefit is there? And is this a direct side effect of the Wolverine leak? There must be better solutions than those suggested above.
One of the best things about winter in New Zealand is the Film Festival, and its always a lottery as to whether I’m flat out working at the time & have to juggle schedules to catch movies, or I’m between projects & can enjoy one of life’s pleasures of going to movies during the day. There is something fantastic about wandering out into daylight after spending a couple of hours in the dark, with the psychological residue of the film still floating around in your mind… I guess it brings back the feeling of childhood & going to matinee screenings of films during the day too…. But Film Festivals serve many purposes aside from the pure entertainment of seeing movies & I figured its maybe poignant to consider the significance of these other parallel functions…
And the last crucial aspect of attending Film Festivals I will leave for David Lynch to remind us of:
When VFX first started to make their presence felt in movies, I was like a fan boy! Yeah! More, more, more – there simply cannot be too many VFX in any movie! But as the years passed I slowly became disillusioned; basically they did not age well. In fact they aged more rapidly than a fake rolex watch, and I sure as hell know which cost more… So it always makes me feel good to see VFX/3D used in a way that doesnt even try to be photorealistic but instead creates new artforms. And while I am on the subject of photorealism, heres a hint next time you are being wowed out by some initially impressive VFX, 3D rendering, or that even more annoying HDR imagery, let me say it in capitals cos I feel like shouting: visually FILM is about CINEMATOGRAPHY which is about CONTROL OF FOCUS & CONTROL OF DEPTH OF FIELD/EXPOSURE so WHY do so many of those dreadful HDR photos & rendered 3D show reels show no true sign of visual awareness by making EVERYTHING in a scene IN FOCUS and OVER EXPOSED????? I dont care how good your 3D modelling is, it just feels like bad ADR & it wrecks every scene its in because it does the ultimate sin of film making: IT UNDERMINES SUSPENSION OF DISBELIEF, or in short it LOOKS FAKE! Arggggg!
Anyway enough negativity, heres a few clips where you can ignore what reality looks like because these are works on art in their own right; they transcend/define their own reality.
The Zoo from zeitguised on Vimeo.
Christchurch Arts Festival ‘PowerPlant’ – Umeric from Umeric on Vimeo.
Much respect to the artists that created those works!
And is that a hang drum on the second clips soundtrack? I initially thought gamelan, but then heard a track featuring a hang drum on an old Giles Peterson show in the car the other day & thought hmmmm…. hang drum = one man gamelan?
Ben Burt was robbed!
I can’t really imagine it keeps him awake at night, and as with any awards ceremony if you dont win at least all that adrenalyn is dissipated instantly (as in; sheesh at least now I don’t have to get up there & make a speech… to a few billion people!!!) & then you get to have a fun night out without any of the endless ego vs graciousness issues that some people maybe handle better than others…
But heres my take on it (and I know I am in a minority since the mpse basically voted as per the Oscar voters) but don’t get me wrong: I have no issue with Slum Dog winning best Sound Mix (if for no other reason than in Hollywood that means production sound mixer as well as re-recording mixers & I haven’t been to India but many friends have & upon returning have described it sonically – enough said… ) And so the ‘mix’ well deserves its accolades… as does the Best Film/Director Awards… respect where due, and it most definitely was!
But those are some cold hearted voters that gave the sound edit award to a bunch of (admittedly fantastic) vehicle effects & a whole bunch of gadget sounds. Yeah yeah… and dialogue, FX & Foley… But how much emotion was in that Dark Knight soundtrack? Were any of those inanimate objects required to emote? I was blown away with the action sequences, but lets face it the same applies to going on a serious rollercoaster ride. And other than fear for ones life, there is no residual emotional impact. Personally the same was true for that film….
Comparitively I felt elated after seeing & hearing Wall E…. and almost cried a few times during… And my niece (5) & nephew (7) felt the same and THAT is quite an achievement, especially knowing ALL of the sound is unreal/(re)created. And I am sorry but can’t say anywhere near the same for Batboy & his mates…. and THAT is what film making is about; EMOTION. End of story.
Methink Oscar frowns on that decision…
If not then I do..
Congratulations Ben Burt!
Ok, can you guess who the actor is throwing the massive tantrum on set?
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
The Oscar nominations were announced this morning – heres the sound nominations, congratulations to everyone involved!
Whats your picks? I suspect Wall E has a good chance at cleaning up both categories which would be double Oscars for Ben Burtt but I havent seen/heard Benjamin Button or Iron Man. Music I would be even less sure of…
There is a very good indepth article about movie marketing in the New Yorker here that also provides an interesting insight into the minds & behaviour of Hollywood studios… heres a few excerpts:
“It is often said in Hollywood that no one sets out to make a bad movie, but the truth is that people cheerfully set out to make bad movies all the time. It is more accurate to say that no one sets out to make a movie without having a particular audience in mind. Many studio executives argue that films can’t objectively be categorized as “good” or “bad”: either they appeal to a given demographic — and make the studio at least a ten-per-cent profit — or they don’t”
And this classic: “Publicity is selling what you have: the film’s stars and sometimes its director. Marketing, very often, is selling what you don’t have; it’s the art of the tease.”
In recent history the most obvious example of stealth marketing was when the film Crash won an Oscar for best film in 2006. How did a small film win against so many big budget, massively promoted films? It certainly had to be a good film to be a contender, but it turns out Lionsgate “the studio behind Crash, the surprise best picture winner at Sunday night’s Oscar ceremony, spent a total of $4m promoting the film ahead of the ceremony with a targeted campaign to woo academy members. The film itself only cost $6.5m to make.”
Amazing huh? Imagine spending three quarters of the total budget of any project just to promote it for an award… But I guess the thing with that award is that its one of the best marketing devices you can have – for the film & for the people who made it.
There is a very interesting article here about the production sound recordist for the hit movie SlumDog Millionaire by Danny Boyle.
Heres a little excerpt – I am (nearly) always very impressed with the great work production sound people do; while there are close to a hundred people on set making the visual side happen there are often only two or three there for sound….
‘The way they were shooting was completely mad for Indian conditions,’ he explains. ‘Things were going haywire. They were not shooting shots, but complete scenes, all in one go. Danny had decided to adopt this approach for the film so, unlike a traditional shoot, where we have one film camera on set, or location, here we had multiple cameras rolling, and entire scenes were being shot over and over again. Danny also decided that he would not shoot using just one type of medium, but use different media. So he had film cameras, high-definition cameras and still cameras modified for motion picture capture on memory sticks. He had a whole bunch of cameras on location and he would use any camera at any time.’
This meant that, as a production sound engineer, Mr Pookutty had to adapt his techniques accordingly. Multiple cameras on location meant close-ups and wide-angle shots being canned simultaneously, which required the boom mics to be positioned in such a way that they were not visible in the wide shots, nor in the frame of any of the cameras. And when there were multiple takes of the same scene, the cameras in a second take would not necessarily give the same frame or the same magnification as in the previous take, so every retake was actually like a new shot. The boom men really had their work cut out.
‘Covering a complete scene on location [read that as noisy Mumbai streets during the peak summer season with a huge crowd of onlookers] with four cameras simultaneously, posed its own set of challenges,’ Mr Pookutty recalls. ‘I had a team of more than 10 people with me at times, because I needed a ton of gear to get the job done.’
There was an interesting post on the gearslutz forum a while back quoting something composer Danny Elfman said; the article/interview cited was called: “Sound Effects Suck.” But rather than be reactionary, what he has to say is worth thinking about, here’s a few relevant excerpts:
‘Elfman isn’t critical of any particular sound designer, as much as the entire freight-train dubbing mentality. “They’re simply doing their jobs, which is to provide every possible sound. It’s the mixer’s job to select sounds and ask, ‘Do we need to hear everything that you see and don’t see all the time?’ What contemporary dubbing is doing is taking all our imagination away from us.”
The situation on Batman Returns was his worst ever. Elfman wrote his music with dynamics in mind, only to find that everything was flattened out by the dubbing mixer. The film was so poorly dubbed that Elfman believes his music actually hurt the picture; had he known how the sound effects would have been used, he would have simplified his writing. “In the end result, I believe that if 25% of the score and 25% of the sound effects had been dropped, the entire soundtrack would have been infinitely more effective than the busy mess it became.” Many composers will argue that a good relationship with a director will help get their score across in the final mix, but unfortunately most directors “don’t have good ears, even the brilliant ones. With Tim Burton, I had my best and worst dubs back to back. I’ve never had a better dub than on Edward Scissorhands, and I’ve never had a worse dub than on Batman Returns. No director does this consciously, they just lack the audio skills to deal with such a complex science.”
So it sounds like he had an ‘interesting’ experience on that film, and its more than a bit self-aggrandising to assume that his opinion is correct & the directors isnt, for dubbing mixers work under direction. But whats maybe more interesting than Elfmans ego is that the title of the article IS reactionary in that it casts aspersions on ALL sound effects, rather than the actual issue, which was about the choices the director made in terms of the final mix of one particular film.
The actual issue, of final mix balances is also a two way street; many a time I’ve had lovely subtle sound effects prepared for a scene only to find when the score is mixed at the level asked for by the director, the sound effects are basically inaudible. And it isnt just a level issue ie turning up the sound effects may not solve the problem. One simple example I remember was during the final mix of Black Sheep; there was a scene where a giant were-sheep was attacking someone & in an attempt to cause a distraction the hero threw a haggis at it. We had a realistic sound effect prepared for the haggis hit but the orchestral score was played loud to reinforce the jeopardy & no matter how loud we played our haggis hit it wouldnt rate. In the end the only sound that would rate was a thuddy explosion.
As a supervising sound editor & sound designer, context is an important consideration for all sounds that are prepared, and it is where temp mixes are very valuable testing ground for possible conflicts & to get some indication as to the likely way a scene and/or moment may play. If sounds need to be heard & simply arent rating due to context, better to find that out sooner rather than later ie well before the final mix.
But what is the role of sound effects in film? Fundamentally sound effects (& ambiences & foley) exist for one reason; to help tell the story. If they are self-serving or detract from the audience suspending their disbelief and engaging with the story then they should not be there. But often it isnt an all or nothing issue, its by degrees… And thats where mix decisions become crucial.
Something else Elfman says is somewhat naive of the usual practice finishing films: “Sound people tend to look at each individual moment. They look at five seconds, and if something’s missing for a fraction of a second, there tends to be a panic. They don’t look at the context over the entire soundtrack and the entire film. ”
News for you Mr Elfman, and I dont know how its possible for you not to know this, but we have specific prodedures for both scenarios: individual moments & the context of the entire soundtrack.
As a supervising sound editor it is my job to insure that every imaginable sound effect is available, based on my own experience & my teams experience but also on the numerous spotting sessions & run throughs we have had with the director. Once you are on a mix stage it can be a serious & costly matter if the mix is held up because source material is not available or hasnt been prepared. So OF COURSE ’sound people tend to look at each individual moment’ because every moment is potentially important, every footstep, every door open, every sound. When we mix, we tend to work through the film scene by scene, so again we are focused on moments but with the knowledge of all the previous ‘moments’ that have been mixed before.
But here’s where I dont understand the gap in his knowledge; every film I have ever been involved with have at least one double head screening & that screening is solely about overall context. Let me explain what a double head screening is. Once we have worked through the entire film, mixing scene by scene, we then output the mix, stitch it together & take it to a seperate screening theatre & watch it in a continuous run, like a normal audience will. Its called a doublehead screening because at this point the picture & sound elements are still seperate. This is the first time anyone in the team has seen & heard the film, accordingly immediately after the screening much discussion ensues & a list is made of changes to be implemented. Then follows another two days or more of mixing, making changes that are partly about details but often about the soundtrack as a whole. Its often the first time that we can do a reality check about overall loudness throughout the film, whether there is too much music (or not enough) & whether the overall film soundtrack is working thematically. And if budget & schedule allows another double screenign is held to check the changes in context.
So sorry Danny, but maybe its just that you have never been invited to a double head screening? Can’t imagine why… but it seems often composers are on to their next project by this stage….
Thinking further about the role of sound effects in film I came across a somewhat academic disertation by someone from University of Nottingham titled: In Defence of Vulgarity: The Place of Sound Effects in the Cinema – vulgarity? say what? It appears the author is out to develop a hierarchy of elements in a film soundtrack, which seems dubious from the outset, but some of what is discussed is interesting & as with some of Mr Elfmans comments bear delaying a reaction until some due thought has been involved… but this chart made me laugh, if only because there wasnt anything in it that I could agree with…
Academics are often unintentionally funny. I remember doing a sound workshop for a group of film makers a few years ago – it was mainly for short film directors, producers etc and during a Q&A at the end someone piped up, asking if I ever use the term diegetic and non-diegetic when working… I had to tell the truth & say depsite knowing what the term meant I had never used it myself nor heard another sound person or director use that term in the 18 years I’ve been working in the film industry. No prize for guessing the occupation of the person asking the question; she was an academic… Welcome to the real world!
Powered by WordPress. Theme: TheBuckmaker. © the music of sound 2008