Baradwaj Rangan spends an afternoon discussing sound with the team of ‘Jigarthanda’, which uses Dolby Atmos technology.
Before we go any further, we need to listen to a Creation story, the Dolby version. In the beginning, man created the screen and the sights. And then he said, Let there be sound. And there was, at first, mono – a single speaker, in the middle of the theatre, behind the screen. Then we moved to Stereo, with a dedicated channel for dialogue, and two additional speakers to the left and the right, which created a better spread of sound. Then came Dolby Surround– as the name suggests, the sound surrounded us.
With the next upgrade, called 5.1, the theatre was split into two “sound zones,” if you will. If a helicopter travelled from right to left on screen, its sound was first heard from the speakers in the right half of the theatre, and then it moved to the speakers on the left. For the first time, there was movement of sound across the audience. Then came 7.1, with even more definition, as the theatre was now split into four zones – the sound travelled from the speakers on the left side to the speakers on the back wall (left) to the speakers on the back wall(right) to the speakers on the right side.
And now, there’s Dolby Atmos, which was first experienced in the Pixar animated feature Brave, in 2012. This isn’t about channels anymore, but about sound emanating from specific speakers. The sound of the helicopter isn’t just in the left side of the theatre or the right side – it’s now heard in Speaker 1, then Speaker 2, then Speaker 3… And for the first time, there are speakers above the audience. So the helicopter can also be heard over your head. Or think rain. With earlier technologies, we used to hear the sound of rain from the sides of the theatre. Now, because the “rain sound” can be restricted to the overhead speakers, we can hear the rain fall over us, the way it does in life. Karthik Subbaraj, the director of Pizza (the first south Indian movie mixed in 7.1), has used this technology in his second film, Jigarthanda, which he described as a gangster movie that unfolds in Madurai.
I met Subbaraj, last week, with his team – sound designers Vishnu Govind and Sreesankar, sound mixer Rajakrishnan, and Dolby consultant Dwarak Warrier. S Venkatraghavan, Cinema Sales Manager – South at Dolby Laboratories, was also present. We sat in a “mix theatre,” before a large screen and an L-shaped console with a million buttons. Speakers jutted out from the walls. Imagine a theatre with no seats. This is where these “sound guys” do the things they do to make the silent visuals come to life. This is where the wind begins to sound like wind, the rain like rain, a gunshot like a gunshot. They also work on the dialogue tracks, raising and lowering volumes according to how close to the camera a character is in relation to others. Subbaraj told me that many scenes in Jigarthanda were shot in old-style houses in Madurai, which had high ceilings. So, after the shooting was completed (not during, because of the noise levels on the sets), the sound guys went to those locations and captured the ambient sound – for instance, the street sounds heard from inside the house – and also got an idea of how voices would sound, with echoes or reverberations, when spoken from various corners of a room. They then used this knowledge while tweaking the dialogue tracks.
Warrier said, “Apart from dialogue-mixing, most of our film makers don’t give enough thought to the possibilities of sound in storytelling at the scripting stage or during the filming process, and in most cases, what you get to hear in the theatre could be the ‘first draft’ as far as the ‘sound track’ is concerned. The sound guys need to be consulted during the scripting stage itself.” That’s what Subbaraj did. He wrote a draft of the script with the plot and the characters and then handed it to the sound guys. They looked at the script and suggested that the film be mixed in Dolby Atmos. Rajakrishnan told me, “If you know the movie is going to be mixed in Atmos, you can add more elements to give more detailing.”
Rajakrishnan designed the sound for Thalaivaa, which was the first Tamil movie that was mixed in Dolby Atmos. That wasn’t a “native” mix, though – in the sense that the sound mixing wasn’t done from scratch in this technology. The sound was converted to Dolby Atmos after the final mix was done, much like how a film is shot in 2D and later converted to 3D. Villa, the sequel to Pizza, was the first film in Tamil to be natively mixed in Dolby Atmos. Now, there’s Jigarthanda. After the inputs from the sound guys, Subbaraj “tweaked the script.” He said, “If I’m convinced, if it’s not going to change or spoil the script, then I’ll add these elements.”
One scene in the original script had a single-take shot that begins in a motel and ends as a character walks into a restroom. Vishnu Govind told me, “In a long, unbroken shot like that, we can show the passage of sound.” And so the script was rewritten. Now the character begins walking from the kitchen of a restaurant, goes through a theatre and then ends up in the theatre’s restroom. Sounds from all these locations ended up in the mix. The sound guys also suggested that the scene would be enhanced by rain, so that was worked in too. I asked them how this was different from the tracking shot that opened Guna, where the camera takes in – without a cut – the sights and sounds around a Hyderabad whorehouse. Venkatraghavan said, “Earlier, with a film like Guna, you could just fade in and fade out the sound [in accordance with the movement of the camera]. Now, when this character is walking through the passage in the theatre, you’ll hear a song from the film that’s playing inside on just one of the speakers around you.”
Some of these inputs influenced the props in the film. For a scene that involved a motorcycle, the sound guys suggested that instead of using a modern-day Pulsar, an eighties-style Kawasaki RTZ would give a more “interesting” sound. And some of the inputs happened during the mixing, after the film was shot. In another scene set in a theatre, the sound guys suggested using different fans for different speakers – so on one speaker, you have a fan that runs smoothly, on another speaker you have a fan that’s making a noise. “There’s a portion where all the fans are switched off,” Rajakrishnan said. And you hear, from each speaker, the distinct sound of a particular fan coming to a stop. “You can never get this kind of effect in 5.1.”
I asked them if the viewer was going to be able to absorb all this information. Warrier said, “The first time you see the film, the sound is not supposed to take you out of it. But at a subconscious level, you will absorb all these inputs.” That is, of course, how cinema is supposed to work in theory – as a confluence of invisible effects. But technicians, inevitably, see films differently – everything, to them, is visible. Rajakrishnan told me how thrilling it was to watch 300: Rise of an Empire. “The first 20 minutes of the film was a literal demonstration of what Dolby Atmos is capable of.” Subbaraj recalled watching Three Monkeys (the Turkish film by Nuri Bilge Ceylan) in a festival. “It’s an intimate family drama. The film has no music at all, except over the end credits. Otherwise, it’s just the sound effects. I could see how they enhanced the emotional quotient of the film.”
I asked him if the increasing awareness of what sound can do might reduce the dependence on background music to shape the viewer’s response. He said that after the sound guys were done with the mixing for that kitchen-theatre-restroom scene, they sent the audio files to the music director Santhosh Narayanan. When Subbaraj and Narayanan saw the scene with the sound, they decided to leave the scene without any background music. “So yes,” he said. “The dependence on background music will decrease as directors use real sound to project emotion.” Rajakrishnan said, “But even with the score, you can add a number of tracks. You can have more clarity – not just left speaker and right speaker. If it’s a song, it can be everywhere.”
I asked Subbaraj if he’d go for Dolby Atmos if he made a smaller movie, say a rom-com, next. He said he would, because the impact is greater. But then, so is the work. “Initially, I thought Jigarthanda would not involve as much work as Pizza, because that was a horror film. We wanted to scare the audience with the effects. This is just an action-drama. But slowly I found that there was much more work to be done here. Pizza was an indoor movie, but here there were many live locations and we even shot candid in some places. We needed to recreate all that ambience.” Rajakrishnan said that he took 15 days to do the sound mixing for Pizza, whereas Jigarthanda took a month. I told him I hoped he got paid more. He laughed.
An edited version of this piece can be found here. Copyright ©2014 The Hindu. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Rajesh
June 28, 2014
Thank you so much Mr. Rangan, for this article.
I saw Autumn Blood yesterday and was simply amazed by the audio visual treatment of that movie with very little dialogue. I now feel, may be, they had used this Dolby Atmos technique.
LikeLiked by 1 person
venkatesh
June 28, 2014
I am always conflicted by these sort of details; After i learnt about Camera techniques i now get taken away from the film, i am scrutinising where the camera is placed and how the scene is lighted rather than actually enjoying the movie.
Sometimes not knowing is good.
LikeLike
Sam
June 29, 2014
Thanks for this article, looking forward to the film.
I didn’t care when Dolby Atmos was introduced. I still didn’t care when my go-to theater adopted it. And I didn’t notice it with the first few films I saw there. But when I saw films mixed without it, I noticed something was missing.
LikeLike
brangan
June 29, 2014
venkatesh: There are two sides to this. Not knowing these things can help you sit through generic films without wincing – you can just concentrate on story, acting, etc., and not give a hoot about craft. You can watch a Visu movie, say, and still “enjoy” it. But the non-generic films play out better when you know what you’re looking for.
But the other side is this: cinema is an art, and to appreciate art, you need certain tools, certain knowledge. You don’t need to know anything about poetry to appreciate Wordsworth, but with TS Eliot, you need to know a bit of technical stuff, a bit of history/background. And I think it’s worth the effort. I mean, you can’t be reading about daffodils all your life 🙂
LikeLiked by 5 people
Ravi K
June 29, 2014
I work in the film/video industry, and while I know a lot about the technical side of filmmaking, it doesn’t mean that I can’t be absorbed in a movie and at the same time appreciate technical craft from a filmmaking POV. If I’m only concentrating on the technical aspects, I’m not engaged enough with a film on a story/character level.
Editing and sound design are “invisible arts” in that if they are done well the viewer doesn’t often notice them. It’s much easier to notice masterful framing, lighting, or camera movement, than it is to notice masterful editing and sound design.
LikeLike
venkatesh
June 29, 2014
BR: Hmm , I hear you and I suppose it does make some sense.
But I don’t watch a movie to appreciate the technical aspects of it. I don’t want to peek behind the curtains. It needs to be like magic so when I “know” how its being done I am involuntarily drawn to the mechanics of the scene. I am thinking of where the camera is placed, the cut, the sound (real or studio) etc.
Keep the trade-craft secret is what I say.
You are quite right about Visu, Bhagyaraj movies though, there is no craft in it; even Bala movies are similar (he literally seems to plonk the camera anywhere) but in some ways its easier to get absorbed in them at a story/character level. There is no craft to get “distracted by”. Interestingly, I do believe there is such a thing as “too much” trade-craft , I simply cannot immerse myself in a Mani Rathnam movie now, its too polished, too well done.
Ravi K:“Editing and sound design are “invisible arts” in that if they are done well the viewer doesn’t often notice them. It’s much easier to notice masterful framing, lighting, or camera movement, than it is to notice masterful editing and sound design.”
– Very astute point. The first commercial movie that I noticed the well-done sound design was Kadhalan.
LikeLike
MANK
June 29, 2014
venkatesh, how about Martin scorsese pictures. His style is very much out there and in your face. That doesnt seem to stop one from immersing totally in the worlds he creates(it doesnt affect me anyway).I have never been more absorbed into a movie like taxi driver or goodfellas and those films are the epitome of directorial style statements and craftsmanship,right?. May making great craftsmanship seamless is another talent in itself.
LikeLike
MANK
June 29, 2014
* May be, making great craftsmanship seamless is another talent in itself.
LikeLike
venkatesh
June 29, 2014
MANK: ” May be, making great craftsmanship seamless is another talent in itself.”
– Absolutely.
Let me give an example , Goodfellas has a great Steadicam shot:
It is clearly a steadicam shot but the movie takes you with it and I am not thinking about camera movement or the shadows on the side etc.
Its a bravura shot but well integrated. Even watching it without any context you know what you are looking at. But we know/I know its a steadicam shot, so there is that.
This here is the master-class on such tracking shots. Absolutely seamless , fantastically well done. First time you see it , you don’t know what it is and the placement of the shot is at the right time, you are coming in cold, the lighting is minimal, the title card is coming up, you don’t even notice the shot , till you go back the second time .
That’s the gold standard:
Now ,this I would consider a lesser example of a tracking shot, I am thinking of camera movement , checking how the props are arranged, where the cut will come etc. I am not in the action (though well done it is)
LikeLike
MANK
June 29, 2014
Venkatesh, Man that was exhaustive and you truly nailed the point..yeah touch of evil is the gold standard for tracking shots.I think the restored version created by Walter murch(as originally intended by welles. the titles and music were the studio’s idea) is even better. With no titles and only background sounds instead of the music. I think the brilliance of the shot is fully revealed.
Its surprising that film technology having developed to such an extend- and we have now so many tools today from Aquila cranes to jimmy jibs and what not- still nothing that todays directors come up with can match what scorsese did 25 years ago or even Welles did 50 years ago.That really is what individual skill and talent is all about and no amount of technology can bridge that, i guess!..Well when was the last time when you were truly enthralled by a singular shot like these . The fast editing of todays films hardly leave any room for taking brilliance any more.
P.S. there is a lengthy tracking shot in RGV’S nagarjuns starrer Siva, with the shot moving into Rughavaran’s den with well placed background sounds.I think he was inspired by goodfellas.That was very good.Watch it from 6:00 onwards.
RGV was a filmmaker who was really good at seamlessly mixing technical craftsmanship in service of good storytelling until he went bell up.He did it so wonderfully in films like satya and company.
LikeLike
brangan
June 29, 2014
venkatesh: It’s not an either/or for me. I am ALWAYS aware that it’s a tracking shot (or a zoom or whatever). But for me, that doesn’t affect my ability to follow the narrative. The tech stuff are like different inputs flowing in, in addition to the main input, which is the narrative. And I do parallel processing. (Like that camera shot I explained in ‘Saivam’ did not lessen my enjoyment of that scene; it actually enhanced it.)
The flip side to this is that I never *lose* myself in just a story 100%. There’s always a bit of distance. But even if you say I am only in the “story” 80%, these other inputs add up to more than 100%.
It’s just a different way to see a movie, that’s all. And it is definitely possible to be affected by the narrative even while being aware of the artifice of it all. I can’t explain it, but it happens.
It’s the same with music too. I am always aware of the various “technical” things people are doing (whether with instruments or with voice), and yet I am also able to take in the song as a “whole.”
As I said, it’s not an either/or.
LikeLike
venkatesh
June 29, 2014
MANK : I couldnt find the restored version of Touch of Evil on YT; Well done sir.
BR: “The flip side to this is that I never *lose* myself in just a story 100%.”
This right here – I sometimes still *lose* myself 100% in the story. it is rare but when it happens what joy.
LikeLike
venkatesh
June 29, 2014
MANK: But i personally actually prefer the Studio version, its somehow “just right”.
LikeLike
ramitbajaj01
June 29, 2014
In Friends sitcom, we know that there is just this hall room. No bedroom or corridor attached. Yet time and again they would try to make us believe otherwise. Rachael would pretend coming from her room. Monica would pretend going into her rom. Joey/Chandler would enter the hall, supposedly by crossing the corridor. We get the artifice of it all, yet we get moved by the narrative. We laugh at the jokes they crack while going in or coming out.
LikeLike
MANK
June 29, 2014
Venkatesh, thanks.
i do get what you are saying with regard to the studio version. It actually works very well as an individual scene, Henri mancini’ score is terrific .but in the totality of the movie, its the restored cut that works.(Thats always been the difference between the studio and the artist , i suppose) It absolutely sets the stage for the dark and seedy drama thats going to unfold.You could just suck in the border town locations and atmosphere better.
LikeLike
Rajesh
June 30, 2014
@Venkatesh – If you are interested in these aspects, watch the Russian movie ARK – it is a masterpiece on a single shot , more than 1 hour and half.
Forgot the name, there is yet another single shot of an incredible fighting sequence, not a brief one, in a Thai movie (cant recollect the name, sorry)
And the best of all , a brilliant example of the wholesome experience created by camera and sound (here silence is the sound) for me at least, there is a 30 minute long sequence from a French classic ‘Rififi’ without any dialogues or bg, but turn out to be bloody thrilling. The most thrilling sequence in cinema, though I have never seen this movie being discussed outside European movie lovers.
LikeLike
brangan
June 30, 2014
Rajesh: Oh, “Rififi” is awesome. The scene you talk of is here:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/9785157/rififi_heist_1955/
LikeLike
Rajesh
June 30, 2014
Sir, would you try to watch Autumn Spring – if you haven’t already, please. The cinematic quality is out of this world. The plot does struggle a bit in the latter half – but its a debut from a writer/director.
What is incredibly interesting, and what I want to know is – the viewpoint of someone who is a writer and also movie lover like you – how you will read the story and find what happened in the past – for the major characters.
I have my own assumption, but want to see if somebody else has the same too or what a movie guy make of it. I read a horrible review, from a US priest who has tried to assume the past, but that was bloody stupid. I would love to hear from you though.
LikeLike
MANK
June 30, 2014
Rajesh, i think it was tony jaa’s Tom yum goong. May be this is the one you are talking about
As for Rififi, i thought it was world famous and favorite in the critic circles along with the other works of Dassin like Topkapi and Night and the city
LikeLike
Rajesh
June 30, 2014
@Mank, oh yes, that was a Tony jaa movie. thanks friend.
@BR – sorry I gave the wrong name in the above comment. Autumn Blood it is.
Do you have a word in English for this problem, something like spoonerism. I tend to use a different word here and there, unintentional, a kind of dyslexia, like in above instead of Autumn Blood, I used Autumn spring. Its embarassing sometimes.
LikeLike
MANK
June 30, 2014
Rajesh, Autumn Blood has a 5.1 rating on IMDB and All what i hear about it is ‘ boring, pretentious and predictable’.Are sure its the same movie by Markus Blunder you enjoyed so much.
p.s. i watched both Manon of the Spring and Jean de Florette on your recommendation and loved them both . So would like to try this one. Oh Btw i did make the maravathur kanavu connection with Jean de Florette. Well i would say that laljose and srinivasan took only the basic element of uncle and nephew conspiring to get rid of a good farmer and developed it in their own way , adapted to the kerala milieu and so on…. But knowing you , i am sure you will not let them off so easily 🙂
LikeLike
Anurag
June 30, 2014
Great article for sound fanatics. Undoubtedly, the most challenging decision of them all in this department is ‘silence’. What makes a scene compelling enough to stand on its own without sound or score is perhaps the greatest mystery. Where ever a picture speaks less than 1000 words, these guys go out to help. Wherever a picture does, but the director wants it to say 2000, these guys still go out !! Kudos.
LikeLike
venkatesh
July 1, 2014
@Rajesh: Yup – Rififi is aces. I managed to own a DVD of it. Do you know the movie was going to be banned at one time cause of that 30-minute scene ? The censors thought it was an instruction manual on thieving.
LikeLike
Rajesh
July 1, 2014
@Mank – please do not judge a movie – especially when it is from outside Hollywood – based on imdb ratings. Many of the European, latin american and asian classics and cult movies are rated not very well in imdb. In fact any teenager can rate movies there.
I dont know may be rottentomatoes is a better place to judge. But basically there is a USA bias for most of these sites. Unfortunately, most other reviewing sites are not in English too.
Try to watch Autumn blood friend. It is audacious in its cinematic quality. There is bit of plot issues in the latter half, but like many other Austrian directors, this guy hits the bulls eye. Especially in this post, where sound quality is discussed, this movie is an inevitable mention, as its silence speaks thousands of words.
reg. M.Kanavu – i dont have a problem if they pick a thread or story from somewhere. But talking about it, as if they woke up in the middle of night from divine intervention or carrying the thread for many years and wrote – I cant agree with that, personally.
LikeLike
Rajesh
July 1, 2014
@Venkatesh – Happy for you. That is a collectors must. Was that an original Dvd, if s, where did you find it, please
LikeLike
venkatesh
July 2, 2014
@Rajesh: Its an original , I am not sure who “released” the DVD but it was from a shop in London.
LikeLike
Vijayakumar
July 6, 2014
Thank you for this article BR, firstly for that brief intro on evolution of sound in cinema, but mainly for bringing to the front, the efforts put in by people working in one of our unsung technical categories of Indian Cinema. They don’t get much awards or recognition here, I am happy they at least get articles like this.
The trailer of Jigarthanda was quite impressive. So was its album. And now this. Its very heartening to see filmmakers like Karthik Subbaraj push the limits of the film-making process here. I have been following him since his Naalaiya Iyakkunar days. His movies always stood out in terms of visuals and sound.
Pizza, though did not work for me mostly due to its stilted climax, had a cool look-and-feel, that not many of the Tamil movies today have. From the looks of the trailer and the shots you described here, it seems like they are trying to create a wacky Coen Brothers-like world, which is indeed exciting. I am eagerly waiting to see this movie.
LikeLike
Another Rajesh
August 4, 2014
For a film that prides itself on using new sound technologies, they did an aweful job of mixing the gangster song in the dry well in the second half. There seemed to be some interesting instrumentation with a horn section and stuff. But everything was muffled to help accentuate the singing and the words I suppose. It ruined that part of the movie for me. Didn’t you notice how badly that song was mixed? Did no one notice?
LikeLike