my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 08-16-2014 08:58 PM                     A bunch of weird anti-heros rebelling against the Evil Empire™ in a worn down out-of-this-world setting, were have we seen this before? The sad part is, this movie might capture the original Star Wars spirit better than Episode 1, 2 and 3 ever did. At least for me, this movie is a successful combination of action, comedy and quite beautiful cinematography. Plot-wise... well, what do you expect from a Marvel superhero movie anyway? I was actually happy to leave the "Avengers Universe" behind for once and you know what? I like this wacky universe better... My biggest complain goes out to the Atmos Mix. Unfortunately I cannot really subscribe to Lyle's enthusiasm. Maybe the Dolby Atmos installation in this theater did have a problem, but the Atmos trailer they played sounded just fine. So, I go the easy route and blame it on Marvel: Marvel, your audio mixing department sucks, they screw up time and time again. This one deserves a special nomination for the most distracting sound mix ever. The most noticeable part is the prison scene, where at one point something akin "ToiletBackgroundLoop8Bit11KMonoPCM.wav" must have made the mix. This irritating, low quality loop of leaky toilet sounds keeps panning around above your head and fades in and out repeatedly. Also, can SOMEONE please tell those amateur mixers that most of the sound from rain falling from the sky comes from it hitting the ground and not from the falling part. So, the sound of rain hitting the floor coming from the ceiling sounds frickin' fake. I will refrain from further examples of bad sound mixing, as there are plenty, but they weren't sufficient to alter my opinion of the movie in general. quote: Terry Monohan Another movie shot in 2-D and converted to save money to phony 3-D. Please, this is the biggest B.S. I've read in a while. First of all, even with both eyes closed, the THREE-DEE looked awesome... And, mind you, I'm generally no fan of 3D. Furthermore... This movie was barely even "shot"... Besides a few actors that weren't some weirdo space creature and a few props in the foreground, it all came out of a huge rendering farm. CGI doesn't need 3D conversion, as you can just render the pictures for both eyes right from the start.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 08-16-2014 09:24 PM                        I had a guy tonight who saw the movie (in our place) 2 weeks ago raving about how great the 3-D was in it. I myself never saw the whole movie in 3-D but what parts I did sample looked really good, I thought. Almost every live action 3-D movie has scenes that were "converted" in some measure rather than purely shot in 3-D. Even "Avatar" had such scenes.  |  IP: Logged Terry Lynn-Stevens Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1081 From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Registered: Dec 2012 posted 08-17-2014 12:30 AM                     quote: Mike Blakesley Even "Avatar" had such scenes. What scenes in Avatar were converted?  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 08-17-2014 04:07 AM                     quote: Even Avatar required tiny amounts of stereo conversion, for example the opening macro eyeball shot was far too close for a stereo camera rig to film, and this first shot of the film was converted stereo from 2D. The source is here.  |  IP: Logged Connor Wilson Expert Film Handler Posts: 190 From: Sterling, VA, USA Registered: Jan 2011 posted 08-17-2014 08:10 AM                     So I heard that the Atmos mix was distracting, both from a person who hasn't heard it in the format and takes Lyle's word for it (Manny), and someone who has seen it in Atmos (Marcel). I can't say for myself, but I liked it in 7.1 both times. An example of rain used correctly in Atmos was 'Noah.' In outdoor scenes, rain was placed normally as it was hitting the ground, but for a shot inside a tent or ark (don't remember which), the rain was on the ceiling because it was hitting the top of the tent or something. I'm not sure if it was mixed like that, but that's my theory on mixing rain in Atmos.  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 08-19-2014 03:21 PM                     I've also heard it in 7.1 now and although it feels strange, I must admit this mix is far superior to the Atmos mix... Which is a shame, really... For me, this sounds like yet another Marvel mix that started its existence as a 7.1 mix and got "Atmosed" by throwing in a few gimmicks, very much like Thor 2. Only they now decided to throw in a few more "special effects", because the Thor 2 mix just sounded like the 7.1 mix for about 98% of the time. The end result is one heck of a bad, distracting Atmos mix. So, do yourself a favor and go see this in "plain-old" 7.1.  |  IP: Logged Terry Lynn-Stevens Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1081 From: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Registered: Dec 2012 posted 08-19-2014 05:42 PM                     quote: Marcel Birgelen Only they now decided to throw in a few more "special effects", because the Thor 2 mix just sounded like the 7.1 mix for about 98% of the time. The end result is one heck of a bad, distracting Atmos mix. So you have had two bad experiences with Atmos. Would you keep going back for movies in Atmos?  |  IP: Logged Marcel Birgelen Film God Posts: 3357 From: Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands Registered: Feb 2012 posted 08-20-2014 01:12 AM                     Yes, because the problem is not the technology itself, it's how it has been used. And my Thor 2 Atmos experience wasn't bad, it just wasn't better than 7.1. The Atmos mix of Gravity was just plain awesome for example. So, I know what the system is capable of. It was clear that the people who worked on it had a good and solid understanding of both what's needed for great "immersive" mix and the technology involved. Maybe Dolby should invest a little more in quality control on the production side and make sure people are using their technology adequately. Not all movies equally benefit from Atmos, so for many movies I just don't care, I just want the sound system to be good. But a sci-fi/fantasy/action/adventure movie like this one would surely benefit from a great Atmos mix.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.