Comparing Fincher's Movies: Visuals And Sound

749 Words3 Pages

The year was 1927, and Warner Brothers came out with The Jazz Singer, the first motion picture with a sound track. Film has now officially begun; it took thirty years for film to include sound. And from here on out, it’s only gotten better, and a whole lot better.
In the early days of cinema, it was always the ideal plan to combine sound and moving pictures together. Thomas Edison and Eadweard Muybridge were working with this concept since 1889 (Lethem, 2010). Star Wars, Jaws, Grease, all these movies from this age all include an amazing sound track and or mind-blowing sound tracks. Star Wars (Lucasfilm) It has been years after the original trilogy (Episodes 4, 5, and 6) and the music for those films have stayed one of the best scores of …show more content…

David Fincher has always pushed the envelope when it comes to the visual aspect of his films and has been a strong advocate for the use of CGI, even all the way back to 1999 with Fight Club. Visuals stand out; it’s usually the first thing the audience notice when watching a film, but sound is different. By design, you’re not meant to notice sound, because good sound design is supposed to be paired so perfectly with the visuals that they go un-noticed. In most films, the only sound recorded on set, on the day of shooting, is dialogue; especially if it’s in a controlled environment, like a closed set. Everything else you hear has been adding in later in post, an effect done so seamlessly that most people won’t …show more content…

Either that be something completely science fiction like monkeys taking over the world, all the way to a historic battle on Normandy Beach during WWII. You get to write the script, hand pick the cast, film the movie, edit, then release your very own masterpiece for the public eye can see. Believe it or not, in reality, even if the audio is clear and at the right volume but the video has some major fault (out of focus, grainy, pixelated, etc.) then the project can still be an overall success and can get positive results.
On the contrary, several studies have shown that if the audio quality of the video is of just medium to marginal quality, that no matter how good the picture turns out viewers are more likely to reactive negatively to the video content as a whole. It’s clear that the success of your video rests more with the audio quality than the video. It’s counter-intuitive, nonetheless audio is more important than video; but if are having a hard time believing that sound isn’t more important than the picture, then it is at least as important.
Don’t think sound is all that important? Think about this: pick your favorite scary movie and watch it on mute. Meanwhile, play a nice, relaxing song in the background, or a comedy track from your favorite standup comic. Stripped away of its intended audio