10 reasons to shoot a silent movie....

mainstreetprod said:
...
We deliberated on whether to use any foley sound and opted not to. We will be asking the composer to incorporate music that is similar to what the foley sound would be if used, such as in the opening sequence of a printing plant. We'll be looking for music with a "running machinery" feel.
Click to expand...

Two notes.

First I believe you are mixing up terms. Foley and FX are two different, but related things. Foley is performed and recorded live to picture on a Foley stage. Anything cut in from other recordings or libraries etc is FX. Generally Foley is used for things like footsteps and clothing movement and things actors handle. Though it can be used for sound fx. It usually comes down to budget and time. If there is enough budget many things can be done faster in Foley than cutting in FX. But on a big picture where the cut is changing all the time you don't want to "shoot" the Foley till the film is relatively locked so then you start getting into time binds.

The second point is as you may have noticed from the above Foley is always capitalized. It's someones name and it's kind of a respect thing.

So cut out those f's or we will have to call out the Foley police!

Foley Police.gif
 
Andrius Simutis said:
I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same show, but the crews changed a lot. Our director was a no nonsense kind of person so she would have gotten really angry if we missed a take because someone said something funny as dialogue in a serious scene. I was playing an FBI agent in one episode and was very tempted to improvise something absurd, but chose to keep it serious and keep the job.
Click to expand...

The scene I was talking about was a wedding party so it wasn't a "serious" scene. The director would tell them the mood and what the scenario was for the scene, or actually the assistant director - the director didn't speak english.

It didn't pay a lot but it was fun and they were quick and a very together outfit. After they left you wouldn't know they had ever been there.

We actually got a call from them the other day, but we are living in Detroit now so...
 
j1clark@ucsd.edu said:
The only time I've 'listened' to radio shows, other than perhaps a local station that has a Friday evening Beer Hour... was the recordings done by "Firesign Theater" in the late 60's, early 70's, and played on a local radio station 'late at night'...

Even when I had a long 1-2 hour commute to and from work, the idea of a 'show', especially the idiotic 'morning shows'... other than music, radio has not interested me much.

I think there have been some retro revivals of radio shows made in the last quarter century... but I've not paid much attention...

As a note... I don't really like TV shows, perhaps in part, due to their 'radio' likeness...
Click to expand...

Radio from the 20's through the 50's was what TV, and the internet are today as far as home entertainment goes. There were comedy shows, westerns, crime dramas, variety shows, etc. There was essentially no music shows as there are now because stations could not contractually play prerecorded music. So there were music shows and shows with music breaks but no "disk jockeys". Also no real "talk radio", though there were some "Rush Limbaugh" style shows.

Many translated over to TV in the 50's. Dragnet, Gunsmoke, The Guiding Light, Perry Mason, The Jack Benny Show, The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet, The Lone Ranger were all radio shows before they transitioned to TV.
 
So cut out those f's or we will have to call out the Foley police!



FoleyFoleyFoley-Foley-Foley-Foley-Foley :laugh:
 
Last edited:
mainstreetprod said:
So cut out those f's or we will have to call out the Foley police!



foley-foley-foley-foley-foley-foley-foley :laugh:
Click to expand...


Step away from the computer and set the mouse down slowly ...


Slightly on the serious side. There are folks who have been significant enough in an area that they get some ongoing special recognition. Considering what you are making a film around I'm sure you understand that.

Jack Foley made a HUGE contribution to sound in films and professional film sound folks tend to take it personal when folks disrespect him.
The skies won't open up and swallow you but if you want to get along with sound folks, especially post sound folks, you should probably tread carefully in some areas.

On this list, not a big deal, but it's always a good idea to not make fun of folks others hold in high regard.

Why? Other than out of respect? Well there may come a time when you need a favor from one of them. There are not a lot of folks other than professionals who can throw fifty grand or so of technology and years of experience at your problem. And those are exactly the folks who will be inclined to look the other way if you have been making fun of their industry.

Again don't mean to make too much of it, I know you were making a joke. But you won't know that your on the s%^& list and it's hard to get off the list. it's a small community, word travels fast. So here not a problem, other places?

I point this out because it comes up from time to time and I don't think people understand how close this can be to insulting someone's religion in certain circles.
 
I point this out because it comes up from time to time and I don't think people understand how close this can be to insulting someone's religion in certain circles.

Sounds a lot like the Seinfeld episode where word gets around that Elaine has insulted dermatologists and she ends up at an animal doc to get treatment for a rash. I've gone back and capitalized every transgression (in bold) and promise to behave from now on.
 
j1clark@ucsd.edu said:
The only time I've 'listened' to radio shows, other than perhaps a local station that has a Friday evening Beer Hour... was the recordings done by "Firesign Theater" in the late 60's, early 70's, and played on a local radio station 'late at night'...

Even when I had a long 1-2 hour commute to and from work, the idea of a 'show', especially the idiotic 'morning shows'... other than music, radio has not interested me much.

I think there have been some retro revivals of radio shows made in the last quarter century... but I've not paid much attention...

As a note... I don't really like TV shows, perhaps in part, due to their 'radio' likeness...
Click to expand...

There are a lot of free audio drama podcasts out there. That's where I find them.
 
I'm going to turn this around.

A silent movie is pointless and boring - it's much much better to have the sound without the pictures (the pictures are much better in a sound only production anyway). :laugh:

In fact, there are more sound only broadcasts than sound with pictures, and no picture only broadcast at all. :2vrolijk_08:

nUKYGoWLliz88sPK0Bhp08w08d.jpg
 
John Willett said:
I'm going to turn this around.

A silent movie is pointless and boring - it's much much better to have the sound without the pictures (the pictures are much better in a sound only production anyway). :laugh:
...
Click to expand...

The first part I highly disagree with and will chalk it up to your never having seen a good example. The second part is, will the bit in parentheses anyway, is spot on.

It's kind of sad that, in the US anyway, we have basically tossed out two arts in preference for one other. Well done audio theatre is fantastic, and a really well done silent film (even with out extra sounds) is also a great experience. Both flourished for a long time, well radio drama a lot longer. but both require a little bit of work by the audience. You actually have to pay attention. You can't text or chat with friends or you get lost.

There are a few films/ shows that this is true of also (try watching the Wire and not paying attention...) but most feed you the story in a very digestible way where you can mis a bit here and there and you still know whats going on. Heck some films you can watch about ten minutes and know what will happen in the next 80. TV especially the "arc" is often so obvious you could see the start and the end and write the script between since it's all a rehash of a sitcom "arc" you have seen a bazilion times before.

My point is they are not competitors any more than a painter is competing with a sculptor. They are different arts. Each can be fantastic when well done, and each can be a bore when not done well. They all involve sound AND image (when done well). But while you can, or should be able to, follow a film with the picture or sound off, neither is the equivalent of a silent movie or a radio drama.
 
davefisk said:
there are people still living in Detroit? You could probably buy the whole city for a few bucks.
Click to expand...

Not quite. It's an amazing place. And no the Howdy Duty mannequin is not the last white guy in the D.

It could all crash but also would not be shocked if Detroit is the "cool place to be" in five to ten years.

The cheap prices for property have brought in a lot of artists and the industrial legacy (the good part) has brought in a lot of young entrepreneurs. The mix, if it sticks, is the kind that creates fantastic change.

I think the direction will be noticeable one way or the other in a few years.

In the mean time I'm enjoying the weather and a huge amount of free or close concerts.
 
Steve House said:
I'm reminded of Mel Brooks classic "Silent Movie" where the only word of spoken dialog was delivered by Marcel Marceau!
Click to expand...

Don't forget the "in the grave" sequence in Kill Bill. Basically a radio play with a few images. Or the first twenty minutes of no country for old men, a silent film with FX.

The best on the radio side I know of, in terms of something you can't really do with images, is a show in the 40's about a bunch of shipwrecked sailors on a raft. Your mental images of what's going on never would have been allowed on screen, and even if they did probably wouldn't have been as effective.

If you have some gross, scary, event you can show it and it can be the scariest thing you can think of. But some of the audience can think of MUCH scarier things and some can't take what you filmed. With radio everyone comes up with their personal scariest image.

"Earth Abides" is another show it would be hard to film as effectively as it plays in audio.
 
Noiz2 said:
The first part I highly disagree with and will chalk it up to your never having seen a good example.
Click to expand...

When I said that a "silent movie was pointless and boring" I was referring to silent without any soundtrack.

I have heard great "silent" movies - but they all have sound. It will be music tailored to the action, sound effects, etc. That's why the great cinema organs all had loads of bells and whistles for the sound effects.

Watch a "silent" movie and then watch it again with the sound muted and you will see what I mean.

So, sound is vital, even in a "silent" movie - even the first "silent" movies had sound, even if it was just an old biddie playing the piano.
 
mainstreetprod said:
I've gone off the deep end, gone full circle (my first 16mm film in college was a non talkie), and decided to make a modern silent film. After shooting the first few scenes, I'm really liking it and came up with a few reasons I'm glad I went this route:


1) No boom op or mixer needed on the crew, saves a ton of money

2) Not having to wire actors with lavs saves time, A/C's and fridges can keep running

3) Lawn mowers, weedeaters, loud trucks and motorcycles no longer mean anything to me.

4) Director can talk to actors during the scene!

5) No boom pole shadows, no clapper needed

6) When editing dailies, drop the clip in the timeline and delete the audio. Nothing more to do.

7) Uniqueness of silent film gets lots of buzz

8) No post production sound work saves even more money

9) Money saved on boom op and post work will pay best composer money can buy for a great score

10) One less forum category on DVX to keep up with
Click to expand...


As a sound mixer, I will never understand why there is so much hate for sound, why it is always viewed as a pain.

Sound helps you tell a story, it's not your enemy, sound is your friend.

I think you are, sadly, one of those "directors" that seriously lacks education in this particular domain.

Yes, the sound mixer is generally the crew member that complains the most on the set. But it's just because we want do our job AS GOOD AS POSSIBLE.

Maybe you've had only bad experiences in the past with the members of the sound department and that traumatized you in some way ?

A movie without sound is boring and ininteresting, even if it's got the best story. Remember that most well renowned directors always say that sound is half of the cinematographic experience, that it's as important as the moving pictures (they only SAY IT though...).

I don't blame you wanting to do a "silent" movie, but you just seems to want to do it for the bad reasons.

As someone said in another post, you should also do your next project without a camera too.

Cordially,
Stéphane Blanchardon.
 
John Willett said:
When I said that a "silent movie was pointless and boring" I was referring to silent without any soundtrack.

I have heard great "silent" movies - but they all have sound. It will be music tailored to the action, sound effects, etc. That's why the great cinema organs all had loads of bells and whistles for the sound effects.

Watch a "silent" movie and then watch it again with the sound muted and you will see what I mean.

So, sound is vital, even in a "silent" movie - even the first "silent" movies had sound, even if it was just an old biddie playing the piano.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. we should probably have better names for these things like "non talkies" and "films with no sound", or something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top