|
|
Post by teleadm on Sept 16, 2020 6:39:04 GMT
Though mainly a theatre actress, Austrian Elisabeth Bergner was active in movies between between 1924 and 1982.   One of her earliest, Der Geiger von Florenz ( The Violonist from Florence) 1926  One of her later, Der Pfingstausflug ( The Pentecost Outing) 1978 |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 16, 2020 7:25:59 GMT
Coogan was Betty Grable's first husband.  Almost as shocking as Mickey Rooney's wives.
That reminds me Coogan was in an episode of a Darren McGavin series The Outsider. He did some kind of burlesque comedy duet--it felt impromptu but they sure made it look natural. Impressive like when Mickey Rooney did his song and dance in Killer McCoy.
Boris Karloff was in a silent Tarzan movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by spiderwort on Sept 17, 2020 17:20:07 GMT
And lest we forget, a 6 year old Mickey Rooney started in silent shorts in 1926 and worked endlessly thereafter, accruing a massive number of credits until his final role in 2017. I'm not sure, but he probably had the longest career of any performer in the film business - 91 years! As Mickey McGuire (1926)  and as the villain in one of his final films, The Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb (2014)  What a career he had! |
|
|
|
Post by teleadm on Sept 17, 2020 18:15:16 GMT
Lil Dagover also had a very long career, in movies between 1916 and 1979  The Cabinet of Dr Caligari 1920  Momento Mori 1975, a German TV movie More about her here: Lil Dagover |
|
|
|
Post by spiderwort on Sept 17, 2020 18:32:27 GMT
Lil Dagover also had a very long career, in movies between 1916 and 1979
Tele, unfortunately I think I only know her from Dr. Caligari (though I suspect I have seen her in other films, too, but I can't translate the German titles which are now on Imdb without translations (!!), so I can't be sure). Thanks for all the added info and kudos to her for her long and very substantial career. Would love to see Momento Mori (big fan of the novel, but didn't know it was ever adapted).
EDIT: Well, you got my investigative brain going, and I started looking for translations. Not much luck yet, except that I'm impressed by how many of her films were adapted from novels, many of which I have read and love. Also, this: her film Schlußakkord (1936), was directed by Detlef Sierck, known in America as Douglas Sirk (Written on the Wind, et al), so thank you for that!! I always assumed that he was American (silly me), but like so many of our important directors he immigrated to America and made it a better place through his artistic endeavors.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Sept 17, 2020 19:02:57 GMT
Just about a week ago I saw Joan Crawford (already mentioned a couple of times) in Tod Browning's late silent "The Unknown" (1927) with Lon Chaney.   |
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 17, 2020 19:03:38 GMT
I guess dubbing was never really a thing in the US was it.
They usually did voice recording on set unlike European films where they almost always dubbed later.
I wonder how film production would have been different for them if they did on set sound-I bet it would have doubled production time.
If they flubbed a line, no one would know anyway since they all spoke different languages on set.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 17, 2020 19:40:47 GMT
Not sure I fully understand your question, prime. For starters, dubbing wasn't a concern in the silent era. And in the sound era American films definitely were dubbed in post-production - called ADR or automatic dialogue for actors recreating and/or changing dialogue in their filmed scenes. As for going from one language to another, that would have been done by actors in studios in various countries who over-dubbed the original language with their own. As I said, I'm not sure about your question, so I hope this in some way answers it.
P.S. If only a line of dialogue in a sound film doesn't get recorded properly sometimes the director will ask the actor to record it then on the set so that it can be edited in with the other tracks. But that would be only for minimal dialogue, nothing long.
What I mean is, in the 1930s, the US didn't do any dubbing right? It was always on set sound. Yet in the 1960s and 70s it seems a lot of European films did dubbing by default.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 17, 2020 20:04:10 GMT
Not sure what you mean by "dubbing" as opposed to "on set sound."
I call it dubbing-where they just shoot without sound and do it all in post. On set sound is where they record the dialogue at the same time. I guess I answered my own question--why would they not shoot it with sound when they all speak the same language on set--unlike in many European films.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 17, 2020 23:07:30 GMT
Not sure what you mean by "dubbing" as opposed to "on set sound."
I call it dubbing-where they just shoot without sound and do it all in post. On set sound is where they record the dialogue at the same time. I guess I answered my own question--why would they not shoot it with sound when they all speak the same language on set--unlike in many European films. My personal knowledge and professional experience is limited entirely to the pre-digital age; I've no idea what procedures are followed or technical terms employed with digital origination, so my remarks will all be film-centric. It can get confusing when single terms mean different things in different contexts, and multiple terms are used for the same thing. "Dubbing," for example, is the widely used colloquial term for dialogue recorded in post, whether in the original language or others, but it has a rather different meaning among sound editors and engineers in the industry, referring to the process of final synchronization of all mixed sound elements (dialogue, music, effects), also known as "stems," to the edited picture and re-recorded to a composite track. Recording dialogue in post, correctly referred to by spiderwort as "ADR" (for Automated Dialogue Replacement) has also been casually known in the industry as "looping," and is as old as sound films themselves. The scene in Singin' In the Rain depicting Debbie Reynolds looping Jean Hagan's dialogue (what you're referring to as "on-set," and professionally known as the "production track") is pretty accurate. although it may reflect some latter-day refinements. Technically, all film is silent, with the sound being recorded on other apparatus and media, and in the earliest days of adding sound to film, a great deal of experimentation was employed to learn which practices worked best. In the years roughly '28 - '30, it wasn't uncommon to shoot a scene without a production track (a practice referred to as "MOS") with the intention of laying in dialogue and effects in post. One can observe evidence of this practice in films of the era particularly in exterior or crowd scenes where an acceptable production track would be difficult, and these were often done in long shot, so synchronization issues would be minimized. When producers decided in mid-production to make the Alfred Hitchcock film Blackmail a talkie, the director was able to use some of the footage already shot for silent release in this way. So, whether one's calling it dubbing, ADR, looping or recording dialogue in post, the short answer is that it goes back to the earliest days of talkies, although it did take those few years of experimentation for industry practices and terminology to become standardized. I hope some of this was helpful, rather than hopelessly muddling the issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 17, 2020 23:36:34 GMT
In the years roughly '28 - '30, it wasn't uncommon to shoot a scene without a production track (a practice referred to as "MOS") with the intention of laying in dialogue and effects in post. I remember a joke a film teacher said in class about that--that it was actually a German expression--this film is "mit out sound."
|
|
|
|
Post by spiderwort on Sept 17, 2020 23:39:48 GMT
I call it dubbing-where they just shoot without sound and do it all in post. On set sound is where they record the dialogue at the same time. I guess I answered my own question--why would they not shoot it with sound when they all speak the same language on set--unlike in many European films. My personal knowledge and professional experience is limited entirely to the pre-digital age; I've no idea what procedures are followed or technical terms employed with digital origination, so my remarks will all be film-centric. It can get confusing when single terms mean different things in different contexts, and multiple terms are used for the same thing. "Dubbing," for example, is the widely used colloquial term for dialogue recorded in post, whether in the original language or others, but it has a rather different meaning among sound editors and engineers in the industry, referring to the process of final synchronization of all mixed sound elements (dialogue, music, effects), also known as "stems," to the edited picture and re-recorded to a composite track. Recording dialogue in post, correctly referred to by spiderwort as "ADR" (for Automated Dialogue Replacement) has also been casually known in the industry as "looping," and is as old as sound films themselves. The scene in Singin' In the Rain depicting Debbie Reynolds looping Jean Hagan's dialogue (what you're referring to as "on-set," and professionally known as the "production track") is pretty accurate. although it may reflect some latter-day refinements. Technically, all film is silent, with the sound being recorded on other apparatus and media, and in the earliest days of adding sound to film, a great deal of experimentation was employed to learn which practices worked best. In the years roughly '28 - '30, it wasn't uncommon to shoot a scene without a production track (a practice referred to as "MOS") with the intention of laying in dialogue and effects in post. One can observe evidence of this practice in films of the era particularly in exterior or crowd scenes where an acceptable production track would be difficult, and these were often done in long shot, so synchronization issues would be minimized. When producers decided in mid-production to make the Alfred Hitchcock film Blackmail a talkie, the director was able to use some of the footage already shot for silent release in this way. So, whether one's calling it dubbing, ADR, looping or recording dialogue in post, the short answer is that it goes back to the earliest days of talkies, although it did take those few years of experimentation for industry practices and terminology to become standardized. I hope some of this was helpful, rather than hopelessly muddling the issue.
Oh, Doghouse6 you've done magnificent job of explaining things regarding recording sound for film in various and sundry ways. Yet another one of your wonders!! Thanks so much! (And I'm still waiting for that book!)
And Prime etc. , I don't think the MOS thing was a joke; rather, the result of it coming out that way from the mouth of a German director -- Fritz Lang, I think, or maybe Erich von Stroheim, not sure, back in the early days of sound, and the phrase just stuck. That's what I was told in my early days in Hollywood anyway. And I always loved it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 18, 2020 1:12:37 GMT
In the years roughly '28 - '30, it wasn't uncommon to shoot a scene without a production track (a practice referred to as "MOS") with the intention of laying in dialogue and effects in post. I remember a joke a film teacher said in class about that--that it was actually a German expression--this film is "mit out sound." If you're aware of that lore and have been to film school, I'm guessing very little of what I wrote was new to you, so, apologies if it covered ground with which you're already familiar. This may be too, but I'll add it for the sake of being thorough: in those early transition years, there were two systems competing for industry dominance; the Vitaphone sound-on-disc system; the RCA Photophone sound-on-film one, which lent itself more readily to the sorts of mixing and editing we've been addressing, and was less prone to the kind of projection mishaps so vividly portrayed in Singin' In the Rain. I'm sure these were among the factors inducing the Warner brothers to abandon their own Vitaphone system by around '31. But there was an ironic benefit to those discs in later years, when film preservation and restoration became prevalent concerns. Vitaphone discs were also manufactured for some films produced with optical sound systems to accommodate exhibitors that had backed the wrong horse, installing Vitaphone for their theaters and not yet able to afford to upgrade to optical. Decades after prints, picture and sound negatives had deteriorated beyond use, those discs containing entire soundtracks became the only remnants of films otherwise considered lost.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Sept 18, 2020 1:22:11 GMT
If you're aware of that lore and have been to film school, I'm guessing very little of what I wrote was new to you, so, apologies if it covered ground with which you're already familiar. It's ok. I forgot quite a bit of it. I still have old books on analog film--editing, all the stuff with sync sound recording. I also have a 16mm Bolex and a fridge full of film stock from the 80s and early 90s.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 18, 2020 1:26:07 GMT
Oh, Doghouse6 you've done magnificent job of explaining things regarding recording sound for film in various and sundry ways. Yet another one of your wonders!! Thanks so much! (And I'm still waiting for that book!)
Knowing the bits and bobs I do of your industry experience, you're the yardstick by which I measure the accuracy of my occasional mini-lectures, so, trusting you to correct anything I may get wrong, your generous praise is always most gratefully appreciated. That's the way I always heard it, and it sounded credible enough. But at this late date, we'll probably never know if it's apocryphal. Still, as they say, "When the legend becomes fact..." And I wanna believe it's true.
|
|
