Discussion
LittleBigPlanet said:
I switched off a little, it was a bit boring. I didn't really 'like' the lead though, his voice I found irritating.
Going to give it the benefit of doubt and tune in next week though.
His voice reminded me of someone else, but I can't place it. It may have been John Hurt as said already, or I might have seen him in something else and I'm thinking of that. Looking at his IMDB though, I can't see anything there I would have watched.Going to give it the benefit of doubt and tune in next week though.
Edit: after a search for video of John Hurt talking, I think that's it. Very similar to the lead's voice https://youtu.be/5fxgiQXzNIo
Edited by ajprice on Monday 20th February 07:51
ajprice said:
His voice reminded me of someone else, but I can't place it. It may have been John Hurt as said already, or I might have seen him in something else and I'm thinking of that. Looking at his IMDB though, I can't see anything there I would have watched.
Edit: after a search for video of John Hurt talking, I think that's it. Very similar to the lead's voice https://youtu.be/5fxgiQXzNIo
I was struggling to think of who his voice reminded me of, I finally got it though, JD from last years apprentice.Edit: after a search for video of John Hurt talking, I think that's it. Very similar to the lead's voice https://youtu.be/5fxgiQXzNIo
Edited by ajprice on Monday 20th February 07:51
hidetheelephants said:
The mumbling/unclear sotto voce was a bit of a distraction; it seems to be a thing now. I realise having everyone projecting away like Brian Blessed turned up to 11 would be inappropriate but there's a happy medium to be struck.
Yes, there is. It's called "speaking normally".Agree about the mumbling audio, and the gloomy lighting. It's an annoying trend in recent TV dramas. One other thing that bugged the hell out of me: constant close ups of characters smoking - everybody was lighting up at every moment, yuck. Yes I know it was 1941 and they want it to look authentic, but come on - is it sponsored by B.A.T. or something? Adds almost nothing to the plot and is just horrible.
Probably give it one more chance next week but I was very disappointed by it.
Probably give it one more chance next week but I was very disappointed by it.
Doofus said:
hidetheelephants said:
The mumbling/unclear sotto voce was a bit of a distraction; it seems to be a thing now. I realise having everyone projecting away like Brian Blessed turned up to 11 would be inappropriate but there's a happy medium to be struck.
Yes, there is. It's called "speaking normally".It's becoming a problem and obviously something they are all being taught in drama school.
When acting for TV and film, you don't have to project as if you are on stage in a theatre - but you do have to speak loudly and clearly enough to get what you are saying heard.
Another problem with modern productions is that the sound recording seems to pick up and emphasise background noise.
Maybe if they took more care of that then the fact that the actors are not speaking clearly would be less of an issue.
Eric Mc said:
It's a drama. Actors should speak properly when acting.
It's becoming a problem and obviously something they are all being taught in drama school.
When acting for TV and film, you don't have to project as if you are on stage in a theatre - but you do have to speak loudly and clearly enough to get what you are saying heard.
Another problem with modern productions is that the sound recording seems to pick up and emphasise background noise.
Maybe if they took more care of that then the fact that the actors are not speaking clearly would be less of an issue.
Indeed Eric, i have a very decent surround sound system with a top of the range Denon and and proper Kef speakers but if I turn it up louder everything increases in volume. I found the scene in the restaurant with the American lady most difficult. I could rewind the passage 2 or 3 times to get it but that ruins the flow of the film. There were a few sentences spoken by Sam Riley that I never could work out. It's becoming a problem and obviously something they are all being taught in drama school.
When acting for TV and film, you don't have to project as if you are on stage in a theatre - but you do have to speak loudly and clearly enough to get what you are saying heard.
Another problem with modern productions is that the sound recording seems to pick up and emphasise background noise.
Maybe if they took more care of that then the fact that the actors are not speaking clearly would be less of an issue.
It's alternative reality. In that alternative reality, Supermarine developed the Mk IX much earlier than they actually really did.
Although why they would do so is beyond me as the Mk IX was developed as a stop-gap because of production difficulties with the Mk VIII - which was developed because the Germans had just introduced the Fw190 - which was superior to the Mk II and V Spitfires in front line service in 1941.
In reality, Supermarine would possibly have ceased Spitfire production with the Mk V and then would probably have become sub contractors building Focke Wulf 190s under licence.
Although why they would do so is beyond me as the Mk IX was developed as a stop-gap because of production difficulties with the Mk VIII - which was developed because the Germans had just introduced the Fw190 - which was superior to the Mk II and V Spitfires in front line service in 1941.
In reality, Supermarine would possibly have ceased Spitfire production with the Mk V and then would probably have become sub contractors building Focke Wulf 190s under licence.
Roll up roll up. Read all about it.
Shock on the internet. When a group of men who are older than they used to be. Find it more difficult to separate speech from background noise, than they used to. They blame the actors.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbGNXSyXdPU
Shock on the internet. When a group of men who are older than they used to be. Find it more difficult to separate speech from background noise, than they used to. They blame the actors.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbGNXSyXdPU
Funny how us "older men" don't have this problem with older programmes and films.That would indicate that modern acting techniques and sound recording is at fault, not our ears.
It's rather strange to think that a TV programme made in 1969 has clearer dialogue than one made a few months ago.
I watched an episode of The Avengers from 1969 the other day and every syllable was clear and distinct (story was rubbish mind).
It's rather strange to think that a TV programme made in 1969 has clearer dialogue than one made a few months ago.
I watched an episode of The Avengers from 1969 the other day and every syllable was clear and distinct (story was rubbish mind).
Yeah, don't get the audio problems you all seem to be having. I watched it through our smaller 40" tv and onboard sound (rather than bothering to go and use the 55" one with Denon surround amp and Monitor Audio speakers) and I though the sound was fine, yes it was mumbly and sotto voce but I assumed that was deliberate. I never had an issue understanding what anyone was saying.
ajprice said:
Vocal Minority said:
williamp said:
so many mistakes? a jaguar?? (would still be an SS)
I was wondering when PH would pick up on thisGassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff