Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2023 April 5

= April 5 =

Resistance to the "talkies"
There’s a lot written about how much the film industry failed to predict the avalanche of audience demand for sound film, but not much written about why they couldn’t see the future. Were they merely trying to protect and defend their mutual interests in silent film, much as the film industry tried to prevent online streaming from taking hold in in the early 2000s, or was it something else entirely? Filmmaker D.W. Griffith famously said, "Speaking movies are impossible. When a century has passed, all thought of our so-called 'talking pictures' will be abandoned." How could people so involved and close to their own industry be so wrong about the future? Viriditas (talk) 10:05, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * At the time, synchronizing voice to the film was very difficult. If you've ever watching television where the sound is slightly off, you know how bad it is. Imagine watching an entire movie where the voice progressively gets further ahead or behind the image on the screen. It was very much a fad, not something truly enjoyable. For many years, technology wasn't avaiable to give theaters a cheap and effective way to produce sound that was perfectly in sync with the film. The problem is in finding a way to put the sound on the film itself, not on a separate disk that had to be started and adjusted to keep it in sync. Then, there was a jump in technology. On a standard 35mm theater movie, the film itself has two clear squiggles running down the side. That is the soundtrack. So, as the movie plays, the projector shines a light through the clear line which is picked up by a sensor and converted into an audio signal that plays perfectly in sync with the movie. The experience was no longer a weird fad. It was enjoyable. You can relate this to 3-D movies. Wearing those uncomfortable glasses to get almost a 3-D effect is OK. But, would you pay extra to have one or two 3-D special effects and walk away with a 3-D migraine? It is still a fad. When you can see a movie in perfect 3-D without any odd head gear, it will be enjoyable and take over the film industry. That expands into home 3-D helmets. When you can play a game in 3-D without a helmet, it will be accepted by everyone. Until then, it is a fad just like the original talking movies were a fad. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 11:02, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thomas Edison, inventor of the phonograph, didn't think much of the machine's ability to reproduce music. He put his money into true "talking machines", which evolved into devices like the Dictaphone. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)


 * This video from YouTube channel Technology Connections is an excellent summary of the technical issues with motion picture sound. That channel in general is great, it is informative, thorough, and yet highly entertaining.  The host's snark is  just perfect, and yet he's quite thorough with his research and his presentation.  I recommend watching any of his other videos as well.  -- Jayron 32 15:10, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that; that guy is great! Matt Deres (talk) 02:58, 6 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Singin' in the Rain is set in that transitional period, and opposition to talking pictures is a major theme. But apart from that, it's probably the most entertaining movie ever made. If you've never seen it, do yourself a favour. -- Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  23:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Definitely! ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:11, 8 April 2023 (UTC)


 * The guy on the Youtube video is OK, but he doesn't talk about Tri-Ergon, a German invention dating from c.1919 which used sound-on-film technology and was used by Tobis Film and then UFA GmbH from around 1925/6 as Ufa-Klang and was the dominant sound film technique on the European continent until the end of WW2. He skates over sound-on-disc which again had been promoted by the Germans Oskar Messter from c.1905 and Jules Greenbaum's Deutsche Bioscope (draft article) in 1907-9. A number of these opera/operetta Tonfilms have remarkably survived, see playlist on Youtube. These films sometimes featured the same singers who made specially-recorded discs, or else they were mimed by other opera singers to commercially-available acoustic 78 rpm records. The films show the general level of operatic production standards in the early 20th century, eg the Sextet from Act II of Donizzetti's opera Lucia di Lammermoor Youtube, sung by members of the Royal Opera Company, Berlin. "Original artists, original stage settings, original tonal effects, original everything!" as one impressed journalist put it.
 * The Americans were attracted to the cumbersome sound-on-disc system until really quite late, even the well-known The Jazz Singer  of 1927 used 15 sound-on-disc electrically-recorded discs and yet our article calls it historical, which it simply wasn't, the technology had been around for 20 years.
 * The guy in the Youtube video mentions Lee de Forest and Earl Sponable, who was intimately connected with the early development of sound films in the US: he wrote a series of articles in the Journal of the Society of Motion Picture Engineers for 1947: Historical Development of Sound Films in 7 parts, starting on p. 275 [pdf 287]. See also History of Sound Motion Pictures, same journal, 1955. MinorProphet (talk) 14:01, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Always good to see you. Viriditas (talk) 20:02, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * As you can see, plenty of people were hugely interested in making sound films almost directly after both technologies became available, and it was the short playing times of early 78 rpm records that was the limiting factor: after about 1910 films just got longer and longer. Anyway, live speech recording was simply not possible while filming.
 * But this doesn't answer your original question, Why did some people close their minds to what now seem obvious outcomes? I would imagine that they were too involved/obsessed/blinkered with particular paths of development, and it needed entrepreneurs removed some distance from the white heat of technological invention to invite the future into our lives. Whether they understand it or not is a different question. If it's likely to make money, some people will just make it happen. Compare multiple book publishers who reject what turns out to be a best-seller. Maybe a psychology question for the humanities desk? My fave early musical talkie is the German version of The Blue Angel of 1930 with Marlene Dietrich and the obesessed Emil Jannings, btw. MinorProphet (talk) 02:37, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Compare multiple book publishers who reject what turns out to be a best-seller. What a wonderful analogy.  I'm embarrassed that I didn't think of it myself. Viriditas (talk) 20:32, 11 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I love this particular topic, please forgive my enthusiasm. The reverse of 'talking films' is also just as valid. In Germany in particular towards the end of the silent era, there were a number of films which almost completely eschewed dialogue - for example, Der letzte Mann (1924, again with Emil Jannings), which famously has exactly one intertitle. The whole thing is completely understandable without explanation. Audiences also got very good at lip-reading. On the other hand, there were some movies designed to be shown in huge film palaces with specially-written musical scores played by a full symphony orchestra - for example Die Nibelungen (1924) by Fritz Lang - subject to various restorations, eg this one (hint: it's not quite the same as Wagner's Ring), and where the music by Gottfried Huppertz (also wrote the score for Metropolis) magisterially sweeps the whole thing along: the intertitles attempt to tell the bare bones of a deeply Germanic story which would have been as well-known to Berlin audiences as King Arthur and the knights of the Round Table in Britain. It's basically early Fantasy or even Sword and Sorcery. There's also Tabu, specifically without dialogue, released in 1931 some time after the talkies had become the norm. And there's always Mel Brooks's Silent Movie. MinorProphet (talk) 06:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * From a director's point of view, I read that some rejected sound because the camera had to be enclosed in a sound-proof box so that the motor does not interfere with direct sound recording. This make more cumbersome to change the camera placement and restricted their creative freedom. --Error (talk) 12:21, 10 April 2023 (UTC)