-

Jump to content



Photo

Austin powers, Goldmember disappointment


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
12 replies to this topic

#1 of 13 Hisham_k

Hisham_k

    Auditioning

  • 14 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 23 2002

Posted January 15 2003 - 08:31 PM

Do not get me wrong all you austin powers fans.
I watched this movie last night and it was hilarious.
When reading the back cover of the Jewel case cover ( i.e DTS-ES, DD-EX) , I said to myself this will be a great demo for surround sound.
But to my disappointment the side surrounds and the back surround where barely active during the whole movie(using DTS-ES track).
I thought that my system is messed up, so I watched parts of Blade II(DTS track) to check it out and WOW what a difference in the audio between the two movies.
So what is the use of mixing the audio in DTS-ES and DD-EX
if they are not used properly ?

Any thoughts ?

#2 of 13 Gary Kellerman

Gary Kellerman

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 127 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 30 1999

Posted January 15 2003 - 09:57 PM

Hisham; I am in full agreement with you. Although I do not have a receiver with a center back channel, a 5.1 receiver can be set up to reproduce the center rear surround track. I heard the same differences between BLADE 2 which I rented some time ago and GOLDMEMBER. I think the word that you are looking for in a good soundtrack is the one WIDESCREEN REVIEW uses; AGGRESSIVE. GOLDMEMBER is a fine example of how not to do an aggressive surround mix with almost nil EX surround. I watched TRIPLE X the other night. I do not believe it is an EX disc, but like THE MATRIX it has an aggressive surround mix around the whole surround field including the center back area. I also felt that some of the music recorded in this film was the finest I ever heard in the Dolby Digital format.

#3 of 13 Jeff Kleist

Jeff Kleist

    Executive Producer

  • 11,286 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 04 1999

Posted January 16 2003 - 03:05 AM

Why does every movie need agressive surround use?

#4 of 13 Chad A Wright

Chad A Wright

    Supporting Actor

  • 740 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 22 2002

Posted January 16 2003 - 03:24 AM

Quote:
Why does every movie need agressive surround use?


I agree with this view. How many times would Goldmember honestly benefit from an "agressive" soundtrack. While there are obviously films that benefit, I doubt comedies like this are in that category.

#5 of 13 Qui-Gon John

Qui-Gon John

    Producer

  • 3,527 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 02 2000

Posted January 16 2003 - 03:49 AM

I didn't know it came in a jewel case!

#6 of 13 Hisham_k

Hisham_k

    Auditioning

  • 14 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 23 2002

Posted January 16 2003 - 03:54 AM

Nobody is saying that Goldmember should have an agressive surround. So if this true why would they mix it using DTS-ES
for that matter, They could have used Dolby digital 2.0 and used the extra space for more extras.
Or is the DTS-ES used for attracting consumers like us who knows the difference between the different audio formats.

#7 of 13 Kyle McKnight

Kyle McKnight

    Screenwriter

  • 2,515 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 08 2001

Posted January 16 2003 - 04:00 AM

The DTS-ES is a novelty feature used to push people over the edge on buying it, who weren't positive they wanted it, but then saw the DTS-ES feature that is all "high and mighty" on their new receiver, so they buy it.
Kyle McKnight

#8 of 13 Hisham_k

Hisham_k

    Auditioning

  • 14 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 23 2002

Posted January 16 2003 - 04:07 AM

Yes Kyle.
This could be a marketing gimmick.

#9 of 13 MichaelO

MichaelO

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 136 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 29 2000

Posted January 16 2003 - 06:58 AM

That's funny, I just watched it and I thought the dts track sounded phenomenal. I thought the mix was very enveloping and the dialog was very nicely recorded as was the music. I thought the track sounded very rich, the louder I turned it up the better it sounded which to me is indicative of a nice mix that hasn't been overly compressed. I found the bass response to be very articulate as well and not overly boomy or sloppy. Now I would nver compare this mix to Blade 2 which was a bombastic mix but for the type of movie Goldmember is I was extremely impressed.

#10 of 13 Tim Fleming

Tim Fleming

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 118 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 02 2000

Posted January 16 2003 - 08:34 AM

Jeff Kleist said:
Quote:
Why does every movie need agressive surround use?


I agree with this as well. In my opinion, one of the films that best demonstrates surround sound is Amelie. That has a DTS soundtrack that is so subtle that it actually enhances the dreamlike quality of the film.
"If we are all God's children, then what is so special about Jesus?"

#11 of 13 TonyD

TonyD

    Executive Producer

  • 16,087 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 1999
  • Real Name:Tony D.
  • LocationDisney World and Universal Florida

Posted January 16 2003 - 11:11 AM

Quote:
Hisham; I am in full agreement with you. Although I do not have a receiver with a center back channel, a 5.1 receiver can be set up to reproduce the center rear surround track.


gary...how is that done?
facebook.com/whotony

#12 of 13 AaronJB

AaronJB

    Second Unit

  • 461 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 02 1998

Posted January 16 2003 - 12:15 PM

The AP: Goldmember disc sounds terrific on my system, with plenty of surround use for both music and occasional effects. It doesn't put the rear surround to great use (unlike Haunting or Lord of the Rings: EE, both of which have amazing rear surround use), but I still feel its an awfully nice soundtrack and uses surround as well as a comedy can.
Aaron
Webmaster,A Guide To Current DVD
http://www.currentfi...m/dvdindex.html

#13 of 13 Ed St. Clair

Ed St. Clair

    Producer

  • 3,320 posts
  • Join Date: May 07 2001

Posted January 16 2003 - 12:33 PM

Goldmember vs. Blade II: Apples & Oranges.
DD vs. DTS: A & O.
Movies are: "The Greatest Artform".
HD should be for EVERYONE!





Forum Nav Content I Follow