Interstellar (2014 film directed by Christopher Nolan)

[King Mark 3,631]

Well he was probably looking for the Joker and it's all that's really important. It's the setup that leads to that scene I mean

[Koray Savas 2,251]

It's called paying attention.

Anyway I just got back. Is it too early to call it a contemporary masterpiece?

[ymenard 54]

After watching the movie, I would *not* recommend anybody seeing the movie based on the extremely poor sound mix. Either they fix the errors or it's too bad for them, word of mouth is gonna KILL the box office.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

Is it too early to call it a contemporary masterpiece?

It's up there in the pantheons with FIGHT CLUB, SIGNS, UNBREAKABLE and PROMETHEUS.

[publicist 4,643]

and US MARSHALS!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Ah, the classics!

[A24 4,369]

I wish MOS had more Krypton material as that was miles better than the rest of the film.

Sorta like the first Thor, right? The Asgard material beat the Earth material.

After watching the movie, I would *not* recommend anybody seeing the movie based on the extremely poor sound mix. Either they fix the errors or it's too bad for them, word of mouth is gonna KILL the box office.

So it suffers from the The Tree Of Life syndrome? Loud, really loud music and soft mumbling? I hate when that happens.

Alex

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

After watching the movie, I would *not* recommend anybody seeing the movie based on the extremely poor sound mix. Either they fix the errors or it's too bad for them, word of mouth is gonna KILL the box office.

Try another theater.

And check Twitter to observe all that "killing" WOM....

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I didnt notice any sound issues in my theatre. Maybe it's an IMAX issue

[karelm 2,915]

After watching the movie, I would *not* recommend anybody seeing the movie based on the extremely poor sound mix. Either they fix the errors or it's too bad for them, word of mouth is gonna KILL the box office.

Try another theater.

And check Twitter to observe all that "killing" WOM....

As everyone is telling you, it's a film mix issue.

"There were those at our screening that indicated that there were some issues with audio bleed, or dialogue getting lost in the cacophonous shuffle of sound effects, score, and whatever the hell else is going on inside the swirling vortex of Interstellar. And truth be told, we also noticed that too; sometimes bits of dialogue here and there would just disappear. But Interstellar is an insanely rich visual experience and a lot of the dialogue is expository in nature, simply explaining how characters are getting from point a to point b (or something). In other words: the dialogue isnt super important, even if you miss out on some stuff, it wont matter much in the end.

So is this just an IMAX issue? Not at all. Peter Sciretta saw the movie on 70mm IMAX and then 35mm film and reported similar issues:

I saw it in 35mm at the Arclight Hollywood and the sound is not as bad as the IMAX Chinese but there are still moments where its hard to understand what people are saying, usually because the score or sound effects are blaring loudly."

Nolan doesn't seem to have an ear for sound: http://www.slashfilm.com/expect-christopher-nolan-change-audio-the-dark-knight-rises/

And from this interview, it seems this widespread issue might have been intended:

Nolan mentions that the sound mix on this film is unique because he didnt want a lot of surround. That might create some kind of overload in the channels:

The most important thing, he said, was the volume; he wanted a lot of simple power, and all of it coming right out of the screen. He didnt put a lot of surround in the mix, because he didnt want a lot of distraction from the sides.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/11/02/magazine/the-exacting-expansive-mind-of-christopher-nolan.html

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Well simply the case that the movie was subtitles here could have been a reason that I didnt really notice any drowned out dialogue.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

The only time I couldn't understand dialogue was during Michael Caine's scene that was mentioned in the other thread, and I attribute that to his mumbling.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

After watching the movie, I would *not* recommend anybody seeing the movie based on the extremely poor sound mix. Either they fix the errors or it's too bad for them, word of mouth is gonna KILL the box office.

Try another theater.

And check Twitter to observe all that "killing" WOM....

As everyone is telling you, it's a film mix issue.

"There were those at our screening that indicated that there were some issues with audio bleed, or dialogue getting lost in the cacophonous shuffle of sound effects, score, and whatever the hell else is going on inside the swirling vortex of Interstellar. And truth be told, we also noticed that too; sometimes bits of dialogue here and there would just disappear. But Interstellar is an insanely rich visual experience and a lot of the dialogue is expository in nature, simply explaining how characters are getting from point a to point b (or something). In other words: the dialogue isnt super important, even if you miss out on some stuff, it wont matter much in the end.

So is this just an IMAX issue? Not at all. Peter Sciretta saw the movie on 70mm IMAX and then 35mm film and reported similar issues:

I saw it in 35mm at the Arclight Hollywood and the sound is not as bad as the IMAX Chinese but there are still moments where its hard to understand what people are saying, usually because the score or sound effects are blaring loudly."

Nolan doesn't seem to have an ear for sound: http://www.slashfilm.com/expect-christopher-nolan-change-audio-the-dark-knight-rises/

And from this interview, it seems this widespread issue might have been intended:

Nolan mentions that the sound mix on this film is unique because he didnt want a lot of surround. That might create some kind of overload in the channels:

The most important thing, he said, was the volume; he wanted a lot of simple power, and all of it coming right out of the screen. He didnt put a lot of surround in the mix, because he didnt want a lot of distraction from the sides.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/11/02/magazine/the-exacting-expansive-mind-of-christopher-nolan.html

That's all great, thanks for recapping what everyone is telling me.

But then why did I and many others also have zero sound issues at certain screenings? That doesn't seem like a problem with the mix to me, but the way the mix behaves in different rooms.

Or are we just ignoring that because JWFan?

[filmmusic 1,897]

Well simply the case that the movie was subtitles here could have been a reason that I didnt really notice any drowned out dialogue.

Yes.

If it hadn't subtitles here, I wouldn't understand what they were saying.

I noticed the dialogue too and you couldn't hear a thing in some scenes.

I wonder how they did the subtitles (maybe they had the script?).

[BloodBoal 7,538]

The only time I couldn't understand dialogue was during Michael Caine's scene that was mentioned in the other thread, and I attribute that to his mumbling.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I'm sure every movie that gets subtitles comes with an exact transcript of all the dialogue in the film.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Well, obviously. If they did it all by ear, there'd be some funny subtitles in some films.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

I'm sure there's a Youtube channel or ten devoted to just that.

[mrbellamy 6,344]

The only time I couldn't understand dialogue was during Michael Caine's scene that was mentioned in the other thread, and I attribute that to his mumbling.

Maybe but the music didn't help.

[Jay 37,529]

Neil deGrasse Tyson Tweets About 'Interstellar'

[Smeltington 1,464]

Saw this in 35mm last week, before discovering to my amazement that we DO have a real IMAX here in Atlanta showing it in 70mm. On my first viewing I enjoyed the film, but was hugely disappointed by the ending. The second time around, with my expectations adjusted, I thought the movie was fantastic on the whole. Lots of great performances, great visuals, believable and inviting portrayal of space travel, and I liked the score as well.

I absolutely -LOVED- the IMAX presentation. The funny thing about seeing a film with this subject in 70mm IMAX was that certain shots looked and felt exactly like an IMAX space documentary, and it made me feel a bit nostalgic.

I had issues with the sound in the 35mm screening, but not the IMAX screening, although I don't know how much of that was real vs. perceived since I was hearing all the lines for the second time in IMAX.

Oh, and they had a great selection of film music playing in the IMAX theater before the movie. The end credits from Last Crusade, and "Mischief Managed" were among them.

[karelm 2,915]

After watching the movie, I would *not* recommend anybody seeing the movie based on the extremely poor sound mix. Either they fix the errors or it's too bad for them, word of mouth is gonna KILL the box office.

Try another theater.

And check Twitter to observe all that "killing" WOM....

As everyone is telling you, it's a film mix issue.

"There were those at our screening that indicated that there were some issues with audio bleed, or dialogue getting lost in the cacophonous shuffle of sound effects, score, and whatever the hell else is going on inside the swirling vortex of Interstellar. And truth be told, we also noticed that too; sometimes bits of dialogue here and there would just disappear. But Interstellar is an insanely rich visual experience and a lot of the dialogue is expository in nature, simply explaining how characters are getting from point a to point b (or something). In other words: the dialogue isnt super important, even if you miss out on some stuff, it wont matter much in the end.

So is this just an IMAX issue? Not at all. Peter Sciretta saw the movie on 70mm IMAX and then 35mm film and reported similar issues:

I saw it in 35mm at the Arclight Hollywood and the sound is not as bad as the IMAX Chinese but there are still moments where its hard to understand what people are saying, usually because the score or sound effects are blaring loudly."

Nolan doesn't seem to have an ear for sound: http://www.slashfilm.com/expect-christopher-nolan-change-audio-the-dark-knight-rises/

And from this interview, it seems this widespread issue might have been intended:

Nolan mentions that the sound mix on this film is unique because he didnt want a lot of surround. That might create some kind of overload in the channels:

The most important thing, he said, was the volume; he wanted a lot of simple power, and all of it coming right out of the screen. He didnt put a lot of surround in the mix, because he didnt want a lot of distraction from the sides.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/11/02/magazine/the-exacting-expansive-mind-of-christopher-nolan.html

That's all great, thanks for recapping what everyone is telling me.

But then why did I and many others also have zero sound issues at certain screenings? That doesn't seem like a problem with the mix to me, but the way the mix behaves in different rooms.

Or are we just ignoring that because JWFan?

The movie was at its best during it's quieter moments - the silence in space, the moral debates, etc. The quiet was very strong and Kubrikesk. So it takes talent, effort, trust (in the audience) and skill to pull that off. The more I think about the movie the less I like it. Visually great. Writing mediocre. Character development weak. Dramatic acting strong. Scientific understanding poor but far better than most movies. Score exceed my expectations. Sound mix mediocre. Most people will simply conclude the movie is "loud" but not understand the reason why.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

So I guess yes, we're ignoring it because JWFan. Wonderful.

The science is far from poor, pal.

[karelm 2,915]

So I guess yes, we're ignoring it because JWFan. Wonderful.

The science is far from poor, pal.

Hmm, perhaps we are not talking about the same movie. It is not worth listing all the science issues....but a few should be listed but I expect won't silence your predisposition:

1. The horrifically bad science behind the love being the thing that transcends time and space. How many scientists do you think agree with this?

2. As any sailors/fishermen would know, a one mile high wave on Miller planet would cause an incredible withdrawal of water (crest and trough) so imagine a tremendously ferocious rip current? None would stand next to water withdrawing to form a huge wave like that. But an impressive and very exciting visual sequence hence my pro-visual/anti-science assessment.

3. Did you notice if anyone eats during this 100 plus year voyage? The ship would not be small but would rather large to provide life support.

4. Logic: the ability to travel through time finds the most important moment to be when Cooper communicates to his daughter rather than oh kill Hitler or stop the plague in the first place that resulted in humans needing to find another world.

5. The high speed docking sequence was cinematic and unrealistic. With the center of mass off balanced, it wouldn't just be rotating but moving in a circle. That would make docking impossible.

Like other movies, it takes creative license on science so please don't pretend otherwise, pal. Yes, yes, a movie can involve suspension of disbelieve. But then don't claim to be scientifically accurate!! By the way, before you spend too much effort refuting me, I do consider this to be one of the best efforts towards science realism but failed to go far enough to make it great! It's a very good premise but lazy execution and script...and failure in the sound mix but no one cares about that in the first place! My point is not to call out all the science failures in the movie but to call out people who claim there are none.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

I won't bother refuting any of them because they're absurd. There have been legitimate science challenges. What you're offering are not among them.

By the way, you're arguing with yourself. You're not "calling out" anyone who says the film is 100% scientifically airtight. I said it's far from poor, never perfect. Which seems to be your assessment as well. We've covered most of the actual issues that people are likely to have and sorted them out. Surprisingly no one has mentioned the few true departures from reality - except Nolan in a recent interview, describing why. Thorne's book is out and can do all of this more comprehensively and knowledgably than I possibly can.

But again, you're arguing with yourself. You're grasping at scientific "flaws". Is it just to give me a hard time? Sure seems like it. You're smarter than this.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

It's a fucking movie not a documentary. Science be damned, it's exhilirating as hell.

[crocodile 8,068]

After watching the movie, I would *not* recommend anybody seeing the movie based on the extremely poor sound mix. Either they fix the errors or it's too bad for them, word of mouth is gonna KILL the box office.

So it suffers from the The Tree Of Life syndrome? Loud, really loud music and soft mumbling? I hate when that happens.

Alex

I think you're missing the point here, Alex. There is no "dialogue" in Terrence Malick's films. In The Tree of Life he's using human voice almost as music and part of sound design. What they're talking about is completely irrelevant. It's more of an echo than anything else.

Karol

[A24 4,369]

Even if that were true, volume and harmony wise, the dialogue competes too much with the music. Clearly, Nolan and Malick aren't very musical.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

They need Bruce Botnick to mix the sound on their films

[Quintus 5,399]

It's called paying attention.

Anyway I just got back. Is it too early to call it a contemporary masterpiece?

No you're okay to call it that.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Most people here who saw it saw its a very good, if not flawless film, Grey.

What more can you ask for?

[crocodile 8,068]

Even if that were true, volume and harmony wise, the dialogue competes too much with the music. Clearly, Nolan and Malick aren't very musical.

That's because they treat dialogue as music.

Karol

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Most people here who saw it saw its a very good, if not flawless film, Grey.

What more can you ask for?

That the "flaws" (and how I hate this now wildly overused buzzword) mentioned are legitimate, not lazy or ignorant gripes! Is that too much to ask for?

There are perfectly reasonable issues to have with the film. I'm merely pointing out those that are unreasonable to prevent any misinformation from being spread. Look at how this "love is the fifth dimension" misinterpretation caught on and how many articles have jumped on board to mock it.

[crocodile 8,068]

By the way, bought the making of book today. Going to read it now.

Karol

[Koray Savas 2,251]

After watching the movie, I would *not* recommend anybody seeing the movie based on the extremely poor sound mix. Either they fix the errors or it's too bad for them, word of mouth is gonna KILL the box office.

So it suffers from the The Tree Of Life syndrome? Loud, really loud music and soft mumbling? I hate when that happens.

Alex

I think you're missing the point here, Alex. There is no "dialogue" in Terrence Malick's films. In The Tree of Life he's using human voice almost as music and part of sound design. What they're talking about is completely irrelevant. It's more of an echo than anything else.

Karol

Completely irrelevant?! The narration is everything.

Even if that were true, volume and harmony wise, the dialogue competes too much with the music. Clearly, Nolan and Malick aren't very musical.

Malick isn't musical? lol

[crocodile 8,068]

After watching the movie, I would *not* recommend anybody seeing the movie based on the extremely poor sound mix. Either they fix the errors or it's too bad for them, word of mouth is gonna KILL the box office.

So it suffers from the The Tree Of Life syndrome? Loud, really loud music and soft mumbling? I hate when that happens.

Alex

I think you're missing the point here, Alex. There is no "dialogue" in Terrence Malick's films. In The Tree of Life he's using human voice almost as music and part of sound design. What they're talking about is completely irrelevant. It's more of an echo than anything else.

Karol

Completely irrelevant?! The narration is everything.

I'd say he's more focused on the very sound of human voice rather than the message of it. But that's just me perhaps. In that sense, he's probably the only purely visual filmmaker alive.

Karol

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Audiovisual. His films are all about how music works with the image.

[crocodile 8,068]

OK good point.

Karol

[A24 4,369]

Even if that were true, volume and harmony wise, the dialogue competes too much with the music. Clearly, Nolan and Malick aren't very musical.

Malick isn't musical? lol

How else would you explain it? Certainly, 'lol' is no argument. His pacing has no rhythm either. Good editing is often musical (or so I've been told).

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Malick is the editing master.

[publicist 4,643]

No wonder, with every movie he spends a decade in the editing room.

[A24 4,369]

Still, if dialogue is treated as music (I would like to see a quote on that), then why not let it sing on its own? Why suppress the dialogue with a score?

If you're going to put music under dialogue, make sure the balance is right. I didn't understand a word of what Pitt was saying. If the words are not important (I would like to see a quote on that), then let the visuals and the music do the talking.

Alex

[KK 3,307]

Yeah, that mix is one of the most frustrating things I had to sit through. Sitting the Lacrimosa sequence, leaning towards the speaker to understand what the gibberish was being whispered...

If you want to treat the words like music, then write the words like that, and make them audible please. Poetry and music are meant to work hand-in-hand...

[crocodile 8,068]

You guys don't get it. Obviously.

Karol

[King Mark 3,631]

Still, if dialogue is treated as music (I would like to see a quote on that), then why not let it sing on its own? Why suppress the dialogue with a score?

Alex

I wish this was the opposite situation with Willliams scored movies in the past 15 years

They even added dialogue echoes in the SW prequels to make sure we don't hear the music

[Koray Savas 2,251]

I have no issues hearing the narration in Malick's films, and if we're speaking about The Tree Of Life in particular, those whispers are where the inner turmoil of the film lies.

[crocodile 8,068]

Cool interview with Nolan.

Karol

[crocodile 8,068]

Here is what Karol thought of the film (tried to avoid spoilers as much as possible).

Karol

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Rumor is, there's going to be a director's cut this time around. Emphasis on rumor.

Already debunked. Sigh....

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I'm sure every film Nolan makes now is a director's cut!