Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Michael Jackson's This is It

This is topic Michael Jackson's This is It in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=001601

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 10-29-2009, 02:04 AM:

Just saw this tonight in Digital Imax, and it was pretty good. I didn't think it was the experience-gasm of a lifetime like the hype promised, but it was pretty awesome to see what could have been.

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 10-29-2009, 08:15 AM:

I wasn't greatly impressed. The film shows that he was certainly a unique dude with a unique talent - nobody ever moved or sounded quite like Jacko - but ultimately this film is just a cash grab. Most of the video and sound quality is so dodgy that this ought not to have received a cinematic release. It's clear the footage is being milked before it hits DVD. This is the kind of stuff that you usually get for free as "extra features". As such they shouldn't even charge full price for the DVD and (*shudder*) the BD but I've got a dollar here that says they do.

Posted by Joe Tommassello (Member # 4632) on 10-29-2009, 04:40 PM:

Stu - that's just ignorant!

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 10-29-2009, 05:15 PM:

Stu, Since the subject of the film died suddenly, during the making as it were, that completely changes the nature of the content for me. If MJ were still alive and did the concerts, and actual concert footage had been released as a feature film and eventually home video, then yes this footage would qualify as "extra throwaway bonus material for die-hard fans only".

Well the concerts never happened due to MJ's death, thus making this footage the last available recorded history of his work. That, and MJ's fame and notoriety (call it whatever you want) elevates it to feature-level material. End of story. [Razz]

I look forward to seeing it.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-29-2009, 05:23 PM:

I plan to see this on video because we probably won't play it and I doubt we will get to Billings to see it before the run ends. I get the feeling this is a movie that might actually play just as well on the TV screen, as long as it's run through a decent sound system -- since it's all footage that was shot for an eventual video release anyway.

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 10-29-2009, 05:48 PM:

Sony just announced the Blu-ray and dvd which i think they should have waited a couple weeks at least because it could affect current box office. [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 10-29-2009, 06:08 PM:

Well I hope they get 'em out before Christmas otherwise people might forget all about Michael Jackson.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 10-29-2009, 06:14 PM:

Is box office looking strong so far? Seems like it would be premature to announce the silver discs now if the limited theatrical run is doing boffo business. Sony is much smarter than me though so I may not know what I'm talking about. [Wink]

Posted by Victor Liorentas (Member # 5272) on 10-29-2009, 06:31 PM:

This just in,a worldwide gross of more than 20 million so far!Sony 3d sdds vision [Smile]

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 10-30-2009, 09:21 PM:

Today 4:20PM at Regal 15 in Eugene, #15, 2K DLP. Looked fine. Major rant about the sound at this show, and movie theater sound in general, and other misc. stuff below...

I enjoyed the movie. MJ still had something, even if it wasn't 100% of what he had 30 years ago. I mean the man was 50 years old for crissake! I give it 3.5 out of 5 stars.

================================

I knew during the previews it wasn't going to be loud enough. This is a freaking music-concert movie goddam it and it needs to be played loud. Well it wasn't loud enough. I made the trek out to the Guest Relations desk and spoke to the manager, politely too. "I know you get this all the time: It's too loud. It's not loud enough. Well I'm saying this is not loud enough. This is a concert movie, it should be LOUD, but it's not." That's all about that part except to say I didn't notice any change being made based on my pleading nicely for more volume.

The best-sounding music-concert film I've ever seen prior to this is U2 Rattle and Hum. That was 21 years ago for crissake and it was in analog sound! Dolby SR in a THX theater when THX meant something (Edwards Hutton Center 5 I think). They played that movie about as loud as their system could handle without going into distress and it sounded great and was a pretty good simulation of a concert in terms of sound quality.

OK, so now 21 years later and we have lossless digital sound and better everything and so why did This is It not only *not* get played at the correct volume (my opinion), but it also sounded like someone put heavy Bekins moving blankets over the speakers, killing all the mid-highs. No crispness whatsoever. If it was a treble control on a home stereo with a range of -10 to +10, this was set on -7. WTF? Maybe it measures "right" but it sounds WRONG when you play actual real music through it. Oh yeah it might sound fine for Cloverfield but nobody knows what crazed space monsters are supposed to sound like anyway so it's easier fool people. Everyone knows what cymbals sound like and they don't sound like someone coated them with spray-on foam or something before the recording session. There was just no snap whatsoever.

Are Regal managers under some kind of corporate mandate not to mess with the fader under penalty of instant termination? Did nobody spend 10 minutes actually listening to this movie and figure out it needs to be played loud? Can't Regal send out an email saying "You have our permission to play this louder than you are normally instructed to; use your best judgment and keep in mind THIS IS A FREAKING MUSIC CONCERT and not Julie and Julia."

Oh and the bestest part of this show is they played a Regal audio promo for Real-D 3D movies in front of This is It and advised the audience to PUT YOUR 3D GLASSES ON NOW AND PREPARE TO BE AMAZED!. So I guess this really is in 3D after all! [Roll Eyes]

============================

Some recording studio and a group of studio musicians and singers must have been booked solid for the past couple months sweetening the audio for this. I can live with that.

Why is it that in concert footage when the singer touches their mic, moving it around and making adjustments, you NEVER hear that? Are they using special Bose microphones that cancel out only the sound of the mic being touched while passing everything else through?

Anyway I liked it, will buy the Blu-ray, and I will play it loud enough on my home system to satisfy ME. [Big Grin]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-30-2009, 09:30 PM:

I don't think Regal has automated faders anywhere. You are asking a multiplex to be there at the start of each feature to adjust the fader between the trailer volume (which should be about 4) and the feature volume (which should be 7, or in the case of this movie 8).

Remember, if they forget to turn it back down, when the next show starts with those trailers being recorded so hot, the manager will get the crap beaten out of him by all of the old ladies swinging their purses at him and damning him to hell. Most managers (and when I say that I am NOT picking on Regal, I mean "most managers" literally at ANY theater) have just given up and leave the fader on a setting that is halfway acceptable to both trailer and feature levels.

That trailer level committee thing did exactly what I knew it would accomplish...NOTHING. [Frown]

Oh yes, and now on to my review.

Its MJ. I couldn't care less and won't waste my time with this movie, so ? out of 5 stars are awarded. If MJ is your thing, more power to you.

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 10-30-2009, 09:44 PM:

MJ was not and is not my thing, but I confess to having a new appreciation for his art and music since his death. Kind of like gawking at a car wreck involving a Maserati.

Just to be clear (and fair) I am not picking on the local Regal manager.

I'm just saying they could maybe do better sometimes and bend whatever their sacred rules are on fader settings to provide a better audience experience. [Wink]

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 10-30-2009, 11:59 PM:

quote: Brad Miller
You are asking a multiplex to be there at the start of each feature to adjust the fader between the trailer volume (which should be about 4) and the feature volume (which should be 7, or in the case of this movie 8).

Why does this seem like it wouldn't be all that hard? If there's a dude in the booth, how difficult would it be to just walk from setup to setup, take a peek at the platter or out the window, and if the feature is playing, gradually adjust the fader to where it's supposed to be?

I mean, if the guy is smart enough to go around and push the Start button on schedule, why not make the same route 10 minutes later and adjust for the feature films if necessary? This is not rocket fucking science.

As for starting the next show "properly," that's easy too -- setup the automation to start the show on "trailer" volume.

Posted by Jim Bedford (Member # 4) on 10-31-2009, 12:16 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
Well I hope they get 'em out before Christmas otherwise people might forget all about Michael Jackson.

I'm sure Joe is as accurate as he usually is. It's just like my generation who completely forgot about that "Elvis" guy.

Posted by Stu Jamieson (Member # 4626) on 10-31-2009, 08:07 PM:

"Like you've never seen him before." "Discover the man you never knew." These taglines must have been lifted from some marketing textbook somewhere because they bear no relation to the content of this film. What is presented is exactly the man we knew, exactly as we've seen him before. The film does nothing to vanquish the image of the unpersonable yet undeniably talented automaton with a firm detachment from reality, it merely confirms it.

With no clear input into the film aside from allowing the cameras to be pointed at him, This Is It is a behind-the-scenes expose of the concert but, unfortunately, not of the man. We don't see Jackson relating to anyone on a personal level. What we want to see is that there is something beyond the man we see in the tabloids; an actual human. But he never let's his guard down; never lets his mask slip. We don't see the man, we only see the performer. Maybe the performer is the man? Given that Jackson has been performing since he could recite his ABC's, this may well be the case. What we get, however, is a slightly loathsome "Church Of Michael" feel about the production and if that doesn't make you feel nauseous then the cloying sentimentality of the post credits sequence certainly will.

The film is loosely structured into the form of the intended concert and from what we see here, had the shows gone ahead this would no doubt have made a spectacular concert movie. Certain scenes betray the original intention to release the concert film in 3D, and there was brief talk of this film receiving the same treatment, but ultimately the available 3D sequences were too few to justify it. It's a pity because this at least may have made the film a worthwhile cinematic experience. As it is, this roughly cobbled together montage of HD and SD rehearsal footage struggles (and ultimately fails) to meet the minimum requirements expected of a cinematic presentation, being more at home as "extra features" on a DVD.

The King Of Pop is dead but the merchandise juggernaut rolls on. It's difficult not to be cynical of the true purpose of this cash-in, it's clear intention being to milk the rehearsal footage of the lost concert tour prior to it's inevitable DVD and BD release. The footage is not without worth, however; far from it, in fact. The film confirms what a unique creature Michael Jackson was. Nobody moved quite like Jackson. Nobody sounded quite like him either. That his infectious brand of pop inspired two generations of budding performers is undeniable and the footage presented confirms why. It's just that the material will be put to much better use in future films about the man than it is here. Had the producers not been in such a rush to push this content into the (paying) public realm; in such a dash to redeem the cash lost on the subsequent concert series; to catch the current wave of Jackson mania before it dissipates, this could have been that film; this could indeed have been "It". Ironically, the determination by others to build their fortunes on his popularity probably is the story of the man. I guess there's some unintended subtext to the movie in that regard.

6 out of 10.

Posted by Jeremy Weigel (Member # 4208) on 10-31-2009, 11:04 PM:

quote: Brad Miller
Most managers (and when I say that I am NOT picking on Regal, I mean "most managers" literally at ANY theater) have just given up and leave the fader on a setting that is halfway acceptable to both trailer and feature levels.

Yep that's true, I have. I've eliminated 99% of the complaints. The 1% are mostly elderly folks that have their hearing aids turned up too much.

quote: Mike Blakesley
Why does this seem like it wouldn't be all that hard? If there's a dude in the booth, how difficult would it be to just walk from setup to setup, take a peek at the platter or out the window, and if the feature is playing, gradually adjust the fader to where it's supposed to be?

I mean, if the guy is smart enough to go around and push the Start button on schedule, why not make the same route 10 minutes later and adjust for the feature films if necessary? This is not rocket fucking science.

As for starting the next show "properly," that's easy too -- setup the automation to start the show on "trailer" volume.

I used to think the same thing, but as one who was a manager/projectionist who worked Regal's former 16 screen theatre in OKC, its not like I was always in the booth at all times. I was also having to go down stairs and manage employees as well as "deal" with customers. Its much easier and less of a pain in the ass to find the volume level that pleases the majority of the audience instead of trying to cater to one or two audience members. In fact, a majority of the time I would ask that person(s) if the volume improved any and they say yes even though I hadn't changed anything.

As for the volume level of "This is It", I've watched it,and didn't have any problem with it at our usual fader setting playing it in SRD (CP65/DA20). I also think that it was a very good movie made for the fans and those that have a curiosity about what all the hub bub is all about (me).

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 10-31-2009, 11:39 PM:

This is precisely why I strongly advocate playing the trailers in MONO! Just change one wire on the back of your sound processor's automation input (for most systems) and voila...no more complaints. The mono even has its own "trim" you can adjust it to whatever level you want so that the main fader sits at a proper level for the feature.

This is also a bit of a showmanship trick, as the advertisements (trailers) should NEVER be more impressive than the feature presentation. Playing them in mono guarantees that.

Posted by Jonathan Althaus (Member # 5042) on 11-01-2009, 01:10 AM:

Luckily for me I'm a booth-only manager. I never have to go downstairs so I can keep my eye/ear on all the films. On weekends, theres always an usher I trust to check on presentation quality. We run trailers and films on the same format, but I usually check on volume on our busier films. But theres always one ass-backward customer that screws up your day and complains to everyone they can until they get free passes.

We were running Cloudy 2D on DTS and had the fader down to 2.0 with some idiotic person complaining it was still too loud. Told another manager that she was a nurse and her child's ears were hurting it was so loud. I had personally screened that movie at 6.5, and it was just perfect (but I like my films loud).

Moiral of the story: Idiots are everywhere and its best to ignore them.

Posted by Damien Taylor (Member # 4255) on 11-01-2009, 01:41 AM:

I've always believed what Brad said, that the all preshow material should be less impressive than the feature. I Run my preshow with the lights at half dim, and the sound considerably lower than feature level.

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 11-01-2009, 02:01 AM:

One good response which always works `if you wanted to watch TV you should have stayed home`. Review Coming up

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 11-02-2009, 01:47 AM:

A couple points:

Not a fan of running trailers in mono. In some cases, trailers are fantastic pieces of art, and to show them in mono is a detriment to that. I would have been sad to hear the trailer for the remake of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre in mono.

People need to understand, although many never will, that modern films and trailers are loud. They need to deal with that. I almost find it insulting when a person would say it is too loud, as if to see I'm not doing my job correctly and running the film at a ridiculous level. As a projectionist, I always saw myself as the caretaker of a piece of art, and would present it as the artist intended. If someone finds a film too loud, don't complain to me, complain to the sound designer.

AJG

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 11-02-2009, 02:06 AM:

Trailers are commercials. The customers paid to see the feature.

I also need to point out that we routinely run the features at 7 when the trailers are ran in mono. When the trailers are ran in digital, complaints are made and the customers at that point will throw a tissy fit if the volume isn't lowered to 5 or so for the feature because they have it in their head that it is too loud, no matter whether it really is or not...all because of the stupid trailers.

So would you consider Screenvision commercials art? You should if you consider trailers art. [Razz]

Nope, mono wins. My feature presentations are more important than some stupid horror or action trailer with lots of cool sounding "whooshes". The feature is what the customer paid their hard earned money to see.

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-02-2009, 04:38 AM:

We used to get complaints ALL THE TIME during the trailers that they were too loud. Most of the time managers ran the booth, so when I would come in I'd find the volume knob resting at 3 or 4, max. Since then I reconfigured the trailers to run at around 3.5 or 4 or so and the movie at around 6.7 or so. The volume resets so even if it is adjusted for one show, it'll be back at 6.7 for the next even when managers run the show. That pretty much stopped ALL volume complaints forever. I say "pretty much" because we still had one CP65 house and one CP200 house, the rest were CP650s. I did the lights and the volume manually when I worked each and every show for these auditoriums since the automation was ancient and inadequate for the task thanks to the cheap-wad owners and of course the managers wouldn't have time to deal with volume changes so they just left it low (and one of those was are large giant screen auditorium). I had finally come up with a solution for all of this without changing automation and was going to do a test when the company and I parted ways.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 11-03-2009, 10:54 PM:

quote: Brad Miller
So would you consider Screenvision commercials art? You should if you consider trailers art.

If I did, they may have to put me away. [Big Grin]

Call me crazy, but many times, the trailers are just part of the experience of going out to the average cinema. It's nice to see what's coming, and also can be a fun way to show off the technical capabilities of a given auditorium.

Yes, we're all going for the feature, but sometimes a well designed trailer is just icing on the cake.

AJG

Posted by Demetris Thoupis (Member # 833) on 11-06-2009, 12:36 PM:

Well after a lot of emotional criticism because I was really a big fan of MJ I decided to write my review. I find the film a very good reward for the fans who wanted to see the concert. Although most of the footage is pre-completed and not at the final version, it clearly shows how MJ was a perfectionist who liked pushing his shows to the limits. Should he shows been made, surely MJ would have made a great comeback. New footage for Smooth Criminal, Earth Song and Thriller were really highlighted and I would have liked to see the Who Is It footage although it was not included in the film nor did it seem that a full final dress rehearsal ever took place. It is clear that MJ was not overdoing it in the rehearsals because it is well known that in front of his fans he really did give tripple the amount he should to give a trully groundbreaking spectacle. I found the sound to be very well in DTS as I watched it in three locations with DTS and one with DD sound. DTS was richer. I do admit that there were moments my eyes teared watching MJ being happy once again as he was so wrongly criticised during the last portion of his life and the moment in the film which got me most was when he was hugging Kenny Ortega showing the appreciation and silently saying `thank you for making this happen for me'. It would have been a trully breath taking spectacle. Rest in peace MJ and know that your music and love and name and legend will live foreer.
Demetris

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 11-06-2009, 12:55 PM:

On the subject of trailer volume, I am reminded of when I saw the trailer for "Twister". It played real loud, had an amazing sound mix, and made a big impression. That 2 minutes or so was almost worth the price of admission to whatever the feature was (I can't remember the feature, but definitely remember that trailer).

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 11-06-2009, 05:09 PM:

When Michael Jackson tries to make everything perfect, people call him a "perfectionist" and lavish him with praise. When I try to make everything perfect, people call me "too anal" and lavish me with incompetence.

Posted by Karl Borowski (Member # 5424) on 11-06-2009, 07:27 PM:

To what field have you been called "too anal" Joe?

I assume you're talking about projection?

Ultimately, while I am a bit compulsive about perfect projection myself, a given projection room is ultimately subject to the bad habits of its worst operator.

For instance, threading from the bottom up and keeping film off the floor is, in part, pointless of everyone in the booth isn't doing it.

Regular screening of the projectors is pointless when every print being run is scratched up.

Getting back to "This Is It's" volume, we're playing it in every sound system but SDDS. Can someone recommend a good increase over standard for each?

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 11-06-2009, 07:58 PM:

[Confused]

In-part pointless? If person A gets dirt on a print while person B makes sure not to, it doesn't make it pointless because in my world less dirt is better than more.

Posted by Karl Borowski (Member # 5424) on 11-06-2009, 08:49 PM:

Yeah, Chris, if five people are dragging the film on the floor in the booth, and one person isn't, you'll be able to see the difference on the screen because of that one person.

I was talking about doing that to avoid scratching up the leader, anyway.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 11-06-2009, 10:30 PM:

quote: Joe Redifer
When Michael Jackson tries to make everything perfect, people call him a "perfectionist" and lavish him with praise.

But that's only because he is dead. If he was alive, people would still be calling him Wacko Jacko and whining that his tour had been postponed again.