I'm not sure if it was just the reel the theatre got but in almost every shot you can clearly see the microphone above the actors' heads. The audience was cracking up. The shots were obviously too high but how the hell could the editors not see this?
shareIs that what I was seeing? I thought there was something wrong with the film print or the projection. This confirms my opinion regarding the amateur look of the film...a "Noir" film?...more like a "Nyet" effort!
shareI saw the movie last night and those boom mics were so distracting that I lost track of what was happening in the scenes. Sloppy!
share[deleted]
It was probably the projection because I didn't see any boom mikes at all. However, I saw a bunch of boom mikes when I went to see Cheaper by the Dozen a couple of years ago. I kept laughing because it would show up at odd moments.
----------------------------------------------------------
Like anything I just said even matters.
Almost half the movie had boom mikes. They were everywhere!
Guess what? I got a fever! And the only prescription.. is more cowbell!-
Christopher Walken
Wow, you took the words right out of my mouth!
As a film student, I was extremely offended by the overly sloppy cinematography for this. When I first saw a piece of the boom during the dinner/restaurant scene I thought it was something getting in the way of the projector. But then I noticed the tip of the mic again. And again.... and then the WHOLE MIC bleeds into the top 1/3 of the frame!! And that happens at least 3 times! I can overlook rarely-occuring messups, but this was so obvious that everyone in the audience noticed it... we didn't know if we should laugh or ignore it or walk out of the movie. I was almost convinced that this blatant error was supposed to be in the script because it was so out there and repetitive. But then it became obvious that it was just sloppiness.
I know a couple of you have already mentioned these probs, but I'm curious to know if this print was possibly a "pre-draft" that was sent to a few test markets (I watched it at the Universal CityWalk theatre tonight in Orlando). The shots with mic booms in them seemed a bit loose, and there was plenty of room to crop the frame near the top and cover up the mics -- right now I'm giving the crew the benefit of the doubt that this wasn't the final cut... there was a very long-winded overdrawn scene in Vic's garage that should have been shortened, and it also had a blatantly obvious boom shadow on the white surface behind Cusack's character, which supports my "pre-draft" possibility.
Please, please, PLEASE tell me this was a distribution problem! If this film really did make it past dailies; post and editing; and final screening with the director, producer, and studio execs; then I'm shelving this film as one to revisit someday when I'm looking for errors in my own projects...
I saw it Nov 25th, 2005 in Clarington, Ontario, Canada. This print had the boom mic in 2/3 of the scenes. It was very distracting. At first I thought it was centering of the film on the screen since at the very beggining they had it to low and moved it up. But long shots of buildings, and outdoor scenes looked centered. It was the dialog scenes that contained all the boom shots, in some, the mic would move from actor to actor.
I informed the staff and manager of the problem, they hadn't seen the film yet and stated "that was they way they must have intended it"
I agree with some on this board, that this print was a draft version. Not one review in the papers reports this, so the critics saw a final version. And a few people on this board commented they didn't see it at all. They must have seen a final version too. It would be impossible to watch this print and not see the mic. Very disappointing.
I saw this is Austin, TX last Saturday and at no point did I see a boom mic. That is all.
shareAs "film students" you think you'd understand the very basis of projection. Many films go out like this, it is up to the projectionist to frame the image to right aspect ratio. I saw it this evening and didn't see any but all the people that did, I can almost definately guarantee that was the problem.
share"Film students"? I think this one (http://www.fullsail.com) is bonafide, so let's discuss without the implied slander... as an attending film student I take offense at it. Not one instructor has mentioned anything regarding print framing before projection. I'd assume that would be discussed with us film students during post classes... don't be so quick on the trigger...
I've personally never seen a film at a theater that was so improperly framed that booms were clearly seen throughout, so when I saw that, I assumed it was a problem with the print itself.
Out of curiosity... how could so many projector operators mess this up with the same movie at the same time?
full sail represent!
my version of the film didn't have the boom mic in it as has been described.....or maybe i just never noticed it...if it was ed wood obvious then i probably would have noticed....
"it is up to the projectionist to frame the image to the right aspect ratio"?
Are you SERIOUS?
Ok, have you yourself ever worked as a projectionist?
And when the film is in the cans, and sent to the theaters, there is that single square for each frame, and the projectionist isn't needed to 'frame the image to the right aspect ratio" for all the other movies to play without the mic in the scene.
I'm not film student. I watch movies. I watch a lot of movies. And when, in the next six months or so, when that movie appears on my tv set courtesy of my cable company, that mic is going to appear! They may correct SOME of the images, but it shouldn't be there.
As for projectionists being expected to "frame the image to the right aspect ratio", MANY projectionists are High School students. Sure, there are some folx that have chosen to make being a projectionist a career choice, but keeping the mic out of the scene isn't something that should be left to the projectionist. The guys making the BIG BUCKS, and getting titles like 'Cinemetographer', they are supposed to keep the mic out of the scenes.
I've heare that before about how the projectionist is supposed to correct it. I wonder if any projectionists were told.
Apryl, I obviously do not know you but I do know Roger Ebert. And although you say you watch a lot of movies it is probably significantly less that Roger sees. I and as far as I am concerned he is a better authority on the subject of boom mikes in movies than you. He states very clearly that it is the responsibility of the projectionist to frame the picture correctly so that the boom mike is not seen. So unfortunately you dodn't know what you are talking about.
By the way I saw the movie last night and there were no scenes where the mike was visable.
Like someone above said, the boom mike was once popping down 1/3 of the screen. If you're gonna frame it to remove that.. well.. some of the scenes are gonna look pretty stupid, when closeups of peoples faces show only the nostrils down... Don't you think?
It's obvious that this is a screwup. Either that or just an Andy Kaufman type of joke on the audience.
They do have to frame it, but it's not supposed to be that extreme :)
[deleted]
What an *beep* Films do NOT go out. You think Spielberg or Kubrick or Scorsese don't scour every frame to make sure it's clean?
This is either sloppiness or intentional.
DOGGA? Could you be more self-righteous? First of all, you are probably right about the pre-draft mistake, because the version I saw in Evansville, IN was mistake free. I loved it, every bit of it, especially the scene w/ cusack and billy bob in the garage, I disagree that it was too long, thats where we saw the most character/relationship development take place. If we lose any of that scene we lose vital information about both characters. What happened to the good ol' days when you could go see a movie for a movie. This film has a great plot line, serious meaning w/ comedic undertone, and one of the darkest scripts i've seen since pulp fiction. It's the best film of the year, so far. Looking forward to Syriana! So anyone wanting to see Ice Harvest don't be chased off by a boom mic scare, the story and the performances far outweigh any editing mistakes. Enjoy!
Mavric22
As a film student and a projectionist I understand whats going on in this whole problem, Ice Harvest is in the FLAT lens format, so the 35mm film frames aren't being shown 100% in this format. Flat presentations often leave the boom mics in the final cuts because when the film is properly threaded in the projector the apperture plate does not show the part where the boom is visible. So case in point the people that complained about seeing the mic should be complaining to the theaters they viewed the film at because their projectionists aren't doing their jobs correctly. This is why some people claim to have not seen any mics at all. They must go to a theater where people know what they're doing.
Happy Watching!
[deleted]
As a film student you should know it's NOT the cinematographer or the editor who is responsible but the 17 year old projectionist earning minimum wage and smoking reefer in between showing who is to blame.
shareOh boy.
Yes, it's now been covered, but dear God, if ever there was a wonderfull example of film school not teaching everything, it's this thread :-)
I remember seeing the Dennis Leary film The Ref years ago in Sydney, and the boom mic was in every single shot - of course, I realised there is no way on Earth that would be allowable in a professional and expensive picture, so I looked into it.
Of course, the projectionist had screwed up the ratio. Seeing the film on video and later DVD - not a microphone to be seen.
I just saw The Ice Harvest on DVD and there 'aint a mic to be seen... not only that, but I thought it was rather well filmed.
It's a pity that some people who should know better don't take the time to research what they're complaining about before shooting off their mouths and making themselves look like total nitwits.
Have a good one.
I have worked on several films, and they never allow the mic to fall in frame, just to rely on the projectionist to frame it properly.
Could you please explain what kind of films do this, and why they don't just make sure it is out of the frame in the first place.
At one point the mic was taking up half the frame, i can't believe this is a projectionist error.
[deleted]
I saw this film at a premiere at the Independednt Feature Project in Chicago, and there were no boom mikes in any shot. It looked fine!
share