A silent film nominated for sound at BAFTA

[Tom Fleischman]

I started to post this the other day and then decided to stay out of it, but after reading the discussion I can't help myself.

You guys are all missing the point. None of these these awards have anything to do with quality. They are all about marketing. I hope I'm not bursting anyone's bubble...

Here's my BAFTA prediction: Harry Potter...

[UnderTow]

Originally Posted by Tom Fleischman

None of these these awards have anything to do with quality. They are all about marketing.

Alistair

[apple-q]

Originally Posted by Tom Fleischman

I started to post this the other day and then decided to stay out of it, but after reading the discussion I can't help myself.

You guys are all missing the point. None of these these awards have anything to do with quality. They are all about marketing. I hope I'm not bursting anyone's bubble...

Here's my BAFTA prediction: Harry Potter...

Not bursting any bubbles there at all.

[Steven1145]

Originally Posted by Tom Fleischman

None of these these awards have anything to do with quality. They are all about marketing.

That's also what I thought when reading through the CAS quarterly online mag: I was amazed at the number of "for your consideration" ads for movies and their sound crews. There must be a big marketing machine behind all that, even though the films themselves were major productions and the sound crews mentioned were all A-list people.
But at least for the Oscars the voters are all from the sound dept (correct me if I'm wrong there), which is sadly not the case in many other countries, hence the sound=music thing.



Sent from my XT910 using Gearslutz.com

[iluvcapra]

Originally Posted by Tom Fleischman

I started to post this the other day and then decided to stay out of it, but after reading the discussion I can't help myself.

You guys are all missing the point. None of these these awards have anything to do with quality. They are all about marketing. I hope I'm not bursting anyone's bubble...

Here's my BAFTA prediction: Harry Potter...

You have the BAFTAs confused with the Golden Globes. Oscars are given to the films everyone wished they'd worked on, and BAFTAs exist solely as a cover to do awesome industry screenings.

Of course BAFTA has that ridiculous "Up and Comer" award... I suppose next year they'll have a BAFTA for hottest couple and sexiest kiss.

[Kuba_Pietrzak]

Originally Posted by Steven1145

But at least for the Oscars the voters are all from the sound dept (correct me if I'm wrong there)

For Oscars sound branch members vote for sound nominees, but for prizes votes the whole academy, which means, that sound is judged by production designers and vice versa (of course theis nothing wrong with production designers, but those 2 specialties are not so close to each other).

regards,
Kuba

[apple-q]

Originally Posted by Steven1145

That's also what I thought when reading through the CAS quarterly online mag: I was amazed at the number of "for your consideration" ads for movies and their sound crews.

Congrats to Mark (and the others that might read this) for his (and their) nomination(s), BTW.

I find it sad that even the sounds people count the CAS award as a marketing thing.

What´s next? Tomorrow mpse? All marketing too?

[Tom Fleischman]

Originally Posted by apple-q

Congrats to Mark (and the others that might read this) for his (and their) nomination(s), BTW.

I find it sad that even the sounds people count the CAS award as a marketing thing.

What´s next? Tomorrow mpse? All marketing too?

The CAS Award is the one that actually means something to me. That one comes solely from my peers. It is awesome, and I am very honored to have received 2 of these nominations today. Congratulations to all the CAS nominees. You are all the best in my book! And thank you to all of you who participated...it is truly an honor to be recognized by you.

[Henchman]

Originally Posted by Tom Fleischman

The CAS Award is the one that actually means something to me. That one comes solely from my peers. It is awesome, and I am very honored to have received 2 of these nominations today. Congratulations to all the CAS nominees. You are all the best in my book! And thank you to all of you who participated...it is truly an honor to be recognized by you.

Yes, both CAS and MPSE are peer group nominations.
I'm proud to have been nominated ths year. To be mentioned in the same list of mixers that have won oscars and Emmys is truly an honor.

[JSt0rm]

Congrats guys.

[Craig Henighan]

Congrats to Tom, Mark and all the CAS noms this year!


best

craig henighan

[Jfriah]

Originally Posted by Tom Fleischman

None of these these awards have anything to do with quality. They are all about marketing. I hope I'm not bursting anyone's bubble...

WHAT?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?

That just seems so.... WRONG. I mean this is the FILM INDUSTRY~!!!!! What's next, no Easter Bunny?

[charles maynes]

I talked with an actor friend o mine on Sunday regarding The Artist- I will confess, I have not watched all of it yet, and I intend to- as the bit I did see was very entertaining, But I have to confess, in the conversation I directly forwarded to my friend (who REALLY liked it) this question- Would it be exceptional if it had had a regular sound track.... his response, was no, it would not be. The dramatic choices were good- but it doesnt show an extraordinary achievement in Film Sound.

[charles maynes]

Originally Posted by apple-q

Wether there are others more deserving is a completely different story.

Please tell me: How many "great songs" does a film need to be accepted as a great scored film?

How many sounds? How many hours of work.

At how may percent will it become art in your opinion?

how many great songs were in "the Social Network"?

was it a brilliant score?.... I thought so- why? becuase it was creatively risky, and seemed to communicate the story well- that was enough reason for it to be considered in the race in my opinion....

[Staccat0]

I haven't seen the film, but it's a bit confusing how it's an insult to sound folks.
They made a bold sound decision (to have very little) and it seems to have paid off. These awards are for artistic achievement more than technical achievement right? I mean, can a film that is made in one shot with no (or in this case 2) edits not understandably win best editing, because you know... it's an interesting use of the art?

I wouldn't over think awards. Its just some opinions.

EDIT: This isn't to imply I think it should win awards for sound necessarily, just that I can understand and appreciate why someone would and don't see how it's necessarily insulting.

[charles maynes]

I would say no to your proposal- certainly in the case of picture and sound editing....

the achievement is in the practice of the craft- not the omission of it. A single take on a single camera angle says nothing to the craft of editing- it speaks to the craft of composition, which is a very different thing.

I guess in the case of "The Artist" for the BAFTA's in may be sensible, since that award is a combo of editing and mixing, but in the case of the AMPAS awards, it would make little sense since the sound editorial work in nearly ever other film released this year is closer to technical excellence. In so many ways it is comparing apples to oranges-

[apple-q]

Originally Posted by Staccat0

I haven't seen the film, but it's a bit confusing how it's an insult to sound folks.
They made a bold sound decision (to have very little) and it seems to have paid off. These awards are for artistic achievement more than technical achievement right? I mean, can a film that is made in one shot with no (or in this case 2) edits not understandably win best editing, because you know... it's an interesting use of the art?

I wouldn't over think awards. Its just some opinions.

EDIT: This isn't to imply I think it should win awards for sound necessarily, just that I can understand and appreciate why someone would and don't see how it's necessarily insulting.

The bold (sound) decision wasn´t to make a so called silent movie (well on the production side it was I guess). The creative sound decisions were already in the script and then done masterfully.

It´s pretty common for film sound people to whine abut them being in the position of retro-fitting great sound ideas to a script that pretty much takes no intelligent effort to use the sound as a story telling element.

I´d say the majority of today´s super-duper films with loads of sound effects are only a tiny step away from a real silent movie (or theater) because they simply put a sound where the image dictates it. For me the power of sound in film begins where that is taken a step further and incorporates sound as story telling element where the image can´t deliver the same impact.

And the nightmare-scene in the Artist IMO is a schoolbook example for masterful usage of sound. The rest of the film doesn't even need sound to tell the story.

It´s remarkable that some of the most most eloquent nay-sayers I have talked to personally and read about on the net haven´t even watched the film but have plenty of arguments against it.

[apple-q]

Originally Posted by charles maynes

how many great songs were in "the Social Network"?

was it a brilliant score?.... I thought so- why? becuase it was creatively risky, and seemed to communicate the story well- that was enough reason for it to be considered in the race in my opinion....

Yep. That´s what I´m saying. The posting you quoted was a response to someone else saying "a single great song does´t make a great album" and that such an award was an insult to all the editors that worked more hours and created more sounds.

[charles maynes]

Apple-q- perhaps, though I would say there is indeed a score in the Social Network. If it were say, two scenes worth of music I think you might agree that it might perhaps be less impressive. The score on Clint Eastwood's J Edgar is very sparse, and perhaps somewhat non-existent.... if that was a creative choice by Eastwood, which is surely was, I would say that the film was perhaps under-served. The issue is not an easy one, because any device like that can be seen as a gimmick. In the case of The Artist. I would indeed say it was a gimmick- and though it serves the purpose of the film itself, I would also say as a practitioner of the art, it does not represent outstanding sound editing.

[Branko]

Originally Posted by apple-q

I´d say the majority of today´s super-duper films with loads of sound effects are only a tiny step away from a real silent movie (or theater) because they simply put a sound where the image dictates it

You're wrong. The illusion that sound design, editing and mixing create makes you believe the sound is simply following the picture. They do follow the story, when they're well done.
Back to the topic - if there would be a film that has absolutely no music, only the composer's name in the opening credits, would you ever consider giving it an award for best music, just because the absence of music was the best solution?

[apple-q]

Originally Posted by Branko

Back to the topic - if there would be a film that has absolutely no music, only the composer's name in the opening credits, would you ever consider giving it an award for best music, just because the absence of music was the best solution?

Of course not. But this is not the case in TA (see my first posting in the thread).

I never says that the absence of sound in TA is the genius part. It´s actually the use of sound in some scenes.

[apple-q]

Originally Posted by Branko

You're wrong. The illusion that sound design, editing and mixing create makes you believe the sound is simply following the picture. They do follow the story, when they're well done.

Just like the live "foley artists" during a silent movie screening in the 20ies. Not as perfect as modern sound design but the intention is exactly the same. See a bird hear a bird. Trying to create the illusion of reality.
My point was that IMO that definitely is an aspect of great sound design but outstanding sound films have always incorporated sound as an aspect of story-telling. The sound not only follows the story as you say but TELL the story where the other departments of film would have been less powerful.
This is rarely something that can be retro-fitted to a film but needs a visionary writer, director, early on sound designer etc. etc.
Not just the situation we all face way to often: "Here´s the film, make it sound great".

Anyway, go see it.

[subbasshead]

I haven't seen the film... If you have & don't deem it worthy of a sound award then fair enough - that is your opinion. But it should not be ruled out on principle. Not to hassle you Charles but the editing example you sight shows how wrong that assumption can be.

"A single take on a single camera angle says nothing to the craft of editing"

That is not necessarily true - take the (brilliant imho) film Wreckmeister Harmonies by Bela Tarr. Some of his films only have six picture edits in the entire film ie the reel breaks. Is a picture editor credited? Yes. Did they play an important role? According to the director, yes, very much so. He explains in this interview, when he asked the exact same question:

Bright Lights Film Journal :: Edgar G. Ulmer's Daughter of Dr. Jekyll

Can you tell me about your collaboration with your wife, Agnes Hranitzky?

We've been working together for nearly 22 years. You know she is the editor, but we have no cuts (laughs). The whole movie is 39 takes, and Sátántangó was around 150. We decide everything about the cutting during the shooting. She is always there and watches everything on the video monitor. She checks the rhythm of the scene, how two scenes will interact and things like that . . .

[charles maynes]

Originally Posted by subbasshead

I haven't seen the film... If you have & don't deem it worthy of a sound award then fair enough - that is your opinion. But it should not be ruled out on principle. Not to hassle you Charles but the editing example you sight shows how wrong that assumption can be.

"A single take on a single camera angle says nothing to the craft of editing"

That is not necessarily true - take the (brilliant imho) film Wreckmeister Harmonies by Bela Tarr. Some of his films only have six picture edits in the entire film ie the reel breaks. Is a picture editor credited? Yes. Did they play an important role? According to the director, yes, very much so. He explains in this interview, when he asked the exact same question:

Bright Lights Film Journal :: Edgar G. Ulmer's Daughter of Dr. Jekyll

Can you tell me about your collaboration with your wife, Agnes Hranitzky?

We've been working together for nearly 22 years. You know she is the editor, but we have no cuts (laughs). The whole movie is 39 takes, and Sátántangó was around 150. We decide everything about the cutting during the shooting. She is always there and watches everything on the video monitor. She checks the rhythm of the scene, how two scenes will interact and things like that . . .

you may need to clarify your point Tim, in the case of the Tarr film I would say if the choosing of where the reel breaks were amounted to the majority of the picture editors contribution, That it would not really be an example of extraordinary achievement in the film editing art. It doesnt minimize the film by any means, but it does not in an objective sense, show outstanding merit in the film editing discipline. Again, given the description of Tarr's process, It seems he had more of a co-director than an editor. For the notion of awards, we should really try to compare apples to apples.

In the case of the The Artist, I could see for instance, a best sound award being appropriate, but to say that a film with two sequences of sound editing (of less than 10% of the duration of the entire film) to be an outstanding example of the discipline, no matter how compelling those moments might be, would not necessarily show outstanding example of the discipline.


edit- one last thing we should consider is that the BAFTA's view "Sound" as a total single endeavor. In the AMPAS awards here in the US, we have both "Sound" which is mixing and recording, and "Sound Editing" which is just that.

interestingly, The Artist was not amounst the AMPAS nominees in the sound categories.

[subbasshead]

The point is that Bela Tarr explains how, when a film appears to only have six picture edits, the editor was still actually making a huge creative contribution that had an important influence on the final film. So my point is that what appears as 'less' as in minimalist art, can actually have as much thought, effort & planning as maximalist art... and shouldn't be discounted until it is seen in context. As I said "it should not be ruled out on principle"

[charles maynes]

Originally Posted by subbasshead

The point is that Bela Tarr explains how, when a film appears to only have six picture edits, the editor was still actually making a huge creative contribution that had an important influence on the final film. So my point is that what appears as 'less' as in minimalist art, can actually have as much thought, effort & planning as maximalist art... and shouldn't be discounted until it is seen in context. As I said "it should not be ruled out on principle"

in the sense of film as a popular medium, I tend to avoid the notion of minimalist/maximalist analogy or critique, The Artist had a unique perspective of using sound as third dimension. It was well executed (having watched the sequence) in its story telling, but the work itself does not necessarily suggest greatness due to its novelty.

in so many ways it is like comparing a Rothko field painting to perhaps something like a Bosch tableau. they are very different expressions.

[Arthurelletson]

Surly the award is for the use of sound as an artistic tool rather than the quality.

I must admit I have not seen either the Artist or Hugo but from what I have fathered from this thread both use sound as an artistic tool but in totally different ways.

I like the idea that was mentioned earlier of using sound in a dream sequence. And from what I understand of the film Hugo sound is a massive part of creating a world, so I think that both deserve aknowlagement for artistic use.

But at the end of the day it is like having and award for artists for their use of the colour White.

[charles maynes]

Originally Posted by subbasshead

The point is that Bela Tarr explains how, when a film appears to only have six picture edits, the editor was still actually making a huge creative contribution that had an important influence on the final film. So my point is that what appears as 'less' as in minimalist art, can actually have as much thought, effort & planning as maximalist art... and shouldn't be discounted until it is seen in context. As I said "it should not be ruled out on principle"

again, if the Editor is functioning moreso as a script writer/editor. In Tarr's case that is not really a traditional example of what a "Film Editor" does. I have no problem with that, but to use it as a common metric is not really fair to the craft as it is commonly practiced.