how do you think sound changed cinema?
- Thread starter LloydC
- Start date
Re: how do you think sound changed cinema?
???
???
Re: how do you think sound changed cinema?
I just wrote a paper on this. Basically, it screwed cinema up entirely for about 3-4 years, then cinema went back to the Classical Hollywood style while Fritz Lang and the Soviet Montage guys introduced new and interesting sonic devices such as the contrapunctual use of sound, sound bridges, and sound as a motif, and this was adapted in Hollywood and expanded upon there. It's interesting that Lang initially disliked film but in M, the clue that leads to the muderer's capture is the sound of him whistling as observed by a blind man....
The first sound films were shot with multiple cameras with each secen in a single take with one lighting set up, constant re-framing, no arc lamps (ugly lighting), and no sound mixing in post. Early sound films are pretty bad.
I just wrote a paper on this. Basically, it screwed cinema up entirely for about 3-4 years, then cinema went back to the Classical Hollywood style while Fritz Lang and the Soviet Montage guys introduced new and interesting sonic devices such as the contrapunctual use of sound, sound bridges, and sound as a motif, and this was adapted in Hollywood and expanded upon there. It's interesting that Lang initially disliked film but in M, the clue that leads to the muderer's capture is the sound of him whistling as observed by a blind man....
The first sound films were shot with multiple cameras with each secen in a single take with one lighting set up, constant re-framing, no arc lamps (ugly lighting), and no sound mixing in post. Early sound films are pretty bad.
Re: how do you think sound changed cinema?
Many film professors would have a strong rebuttle to my opinion, but...
I think film before sound was bad. I hate to generalize, and I am speaking in general terms, but I don't think filmmakers had the artform figured out until the 30s. I spent a semester studying films from the first 25 years of the 20th century and I think most of them were poorly told stories. I am not necessarily saying that silent films are bad, I just think the craft was not quite figured out.
I think sound and the refinement of the craft made for some great films in the 30s, 40s, 50s and beyond. I think it's great to study the history of film to see how bad films can be. I heard a quote once, and this is not verbatim, but... "There are no "bad" movies out there because you can learn what NOT to do from these "bad" films."
"Birth of a Nation" is consider a masterpiece by many. It was undoubtably revolutionary, but I think it is a horribly executed piece of work.
Many film professors would have a strong rebuttle to my opinion, but...
I think film before sound was bad. I hate to generalize, and I am speaking in general terms, but I don't think filmmakers had the artform figured out until the 30s. I spent a semester studying films from the first 25 years of the 20th century and I think most of them were poorly told stories. I am not necessarily saying that silent films are bad, I just think the craft was not quite figured out.
I think sound and the refinement of the craft made for some great films in the 30s, 40s, 50s and beyond. I think it's great to study the history of film to see how bad films can be. I heard a quote once, and this is not verbatim, but... "There are no "bad" movies out there because you can learn what NOT to do from these "bad" films."
"Birth of a Nation" is consider a masterpiece by many. It was undoubtably revolutionary, but I think it is a horribly executed piece of work.
Re: how do you think sound changed cinema?
Quote: "Personally I dislike silent films. They just don't hold any emotion."
You might want to check out Chaplin's City Lights. I'm not a big fan of silent films but I was moved by this film. I'm also really impressed by the work of Buster Keaton. Despite not having the film grammar were accustomed to today both Chaplin and Keaton were brilliant at blocking their action within those limitations. Spielberg quotes a Buster Keaton film with the train chase scene in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. Not only that, but the fluidity of motion in Spielbergs action scenes is partly influenced by Keaton and Chaplin in the silent era.
In another vein, Stan Brakhage totally spurned sound in his experimental films and had his own ideas about the purity of cinema: no sound, just visuals. It's fascinating to watch his work, especially Window Water Baby Moving about the birth of one of his children. It's an emotional piece of filmmaking and if nothing else may make you think about filmmaking differently.
I'm just a little cautious in judging some works out of context and out of time period. Birth of a Nation may lack the slickness were accustomed to, but within it's own time period it totally blew people's minds.
Quote: "Personally I dislike silent films. They just don't hold any emotion."
You might want to check out Chaplin's City Lights. I'm not a big fan of silent films but I was moved by this film. I'm also really impressed by the work of Buster Keaton. Despite not having the film grammar were accustomed to today both Chaplin and Keaton were brilliant at blocking their action within those limitations. Spielberg quotes a Buster Keaton film with the train chase scene in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. Not only that, but the fluidity of motion in Spielbergs action scenes is partly influenced by Keaton and Chaplin in the silent era.
In another vein, Stan Brakhage totally spurned sound in his experimental films and had his own ideas about the purity of cinema: no sound, just visuals. It's fascinating to watch his work, especially Window Water Baby Moving about the birth of one of his children. It's an emotional piece of filmmaking and if nothing else may make you think about filmmaking differently.
I'm just a little cautious in judging some works out of context and out of time period. Birth of a Nation may lack the slickness were accustomed to, but within it's own time period it totally blew people's minds.
Re: how do you think sound changed cinema?
See Dreyer's The Passion of Joan of Arc. Pretty intense stuff, and silent.
An even better example would be Battleship Potempkin or Strike just because they are so jarring. Eisenstein was a master. Seriously check this stuff out, it's hard not to feel something after watching these brilliant films.
See Dreyer's The Passion of Joan of Arc. Pretty intense stuff, and silent.
An even better example would be Battleship Potempkin or Strike just because they are so jarring. Eisenstein was a master. Seriously check this stuff out, it's hard not to feel something after watching these brilliant films.
Re: how do you think sound changed cinema?
Joan of Arc and Battleship Potemkin are awesome silent flicks. I love those maggots and rotting meat in Potemkin.
Getting back to the original question I think one of the limitations of sound, if you want to call it a limitation is the misuse of music in films. It's kind of like the fix it in post attitude where people will try and put bandaids in post production on poor shooting. Some films will be emotionally lacking and music will be the bandaid/fix it in post solution. As an audience member I feel cheated when a film will use music for an emotion that's not in the scene. I guess the limitation/danger is finding that careful balance between visual and sound.
Sometimes I'll turn down the sound of a film and just watch the visuals. Raising Arizona is an awesome film to watch without sound.
Joan of Arc and Battleship Potemkin are awesome silent flicks. I love those maggots and rotting meat in Potemkin.
Getting back to the original question I think one of the limitations of sound, if you want to call it a limitation is the misuse of music in films. It's kind of like the fix it in post attitude where people will try and put bandaids in post production on poor shooting. Some films will be emotionally lacking and music will be the bandaid/fix it in post solution. As an audience member I feel cheated when a film will use music for an emotion that's not in the scene. I guess the limitation/danger is finding that careful balance between visual and sound.
Sometimes I'll turn down the sound of a film and just watch the visuals. Raising Arizona is an awesome film to watch without sound.
Re: how do you think sound changed cinema?
What's interesting is that silent films had musical scores, although very few had music specifically written for them. Sound was initially introduced by Warner Brothers to allow for music to play without the need of an orchestra (which was expensive); speech and sound effects were secondary.
What's interesting is that silent films had musical scores, although very few had music specifically written for them. Sound was initially introduced by Warner Brothers to allow for music to play without the need of an orchestra (which was expensive); speech and sound effects were secondary.