AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
6,2/10
18 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
O trabalho de um engenheiro de som para um estúdio de terror italiano torna-se um caso terrível da vida imitando a arte.O trabalho de um engenheiro de som para um estúdio de terror italiano torna-se um caso terrível da vida imitando a arte.O trabalho de um engenheiro de som para um estúdio de terror italiano torna-se um caso terrível da vida imitando a arte.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 16 vitórias e 16 indicações no total
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
I'm a big fan of films where impressionable protagonists enter a world of images and fictions. The challenge is how to model madness, by what degrees to confuse and clarify. DePalma could do this type of film, fooling with layered placement and identity of the eye—it'd be as cool as this and obvious in its main thrust about madness, but probably not as ambient. Lynch could in a more powerful way.
The story is that a shy sound-man goes to work on an Italian exploitation movie, this is to establish him as a creative person who will have to imagine things, and to establish the things he's going to imagine as of some darkness. He is an introvert, so we can have this conflation of inner and outer sensitivity to phenomena. Funny: shy is here equated with unattractive appearance in the main actor.
The film is entirely contained on a soundstage and around the studio where the soundtrack is being prepared. The actual horror movie is never seen (except for the opening credits which serve as the credits to our film), always inferred from what we see of the sound-carpet being fitted, the screams and slashing sounds, and this is a crucial point: the horror movie never quite materializes, so there's widespread negativity in reviews.
Oh, we get obvious hallucination in the latter stages that I could do without, linked to movie screens as borders of reality — it clarifies too much. But there's something else I liked, simple and inventive.
All sorts of sound effects are constructed over the course of the film before our eyes, from ordinary means: melons are slashed, pumpkins are splattered, broth is boiling. The first time we see the effect being recorded, and then an off-screen voice announces what it is supposed to be the sound of, and it's done a second time. It's fun to see on a fundamental level as exposing the kind of unceremonious but inventive technical work that takes place behind cinematic curtains of illusion.
But more marvelous is exemplifying the mechanism of that illusion that creates the imagined horror story in our mind — the second time the sound becomes the mental image just described to us. By making it so immediate, it's a powerful exhibit, observable in your own self, of the mind acquiring illusory images — the images become what the off- screen voice announces. Wickedly clever! Because it puts us in the protagonist's shoes, by introducing a disruptive level of imagination.
So I think you must see this at one point. Based on his previous film and now this, I have this filmmaker on my short list of talent that I expect he has it in him to be a leading voice a decade from now.
The story is that a shy sound-man goes to work on an Italian exploitation movie, this is to establish him as a creative person who will have to imagine things, and to establish the things he's going to imagine as of some darkness. He is an introvert, so we can have this conflation of inner and outer sensitivity to phenomena. Funny: shy is here equated with unattractive appearance in the main actor.
The film is entirely contained on a soundstage and around the studio where the soundtrack is being prepared. The actual horror movie is never seen (except for the opening credits which serve as the credits to our film), always inferred from what we see of the sound-carpet being fitted, the screams and slashing sounds, and this is a crucial point: the horror movie never quite materializes, so there's widespread negativity in reviews.
Oh, we get obvious hallucination in the latter stages that I could do without, linked to movie screens as borders of reality — it clarifies too much. But there's something else I liked, simple and inventive.
All sorts of sound effects are constructed over the course of the film before our eyes, from ordinary means: melons are slashed, pumpkins are splattered, broth is boiling. The first time we see the effect being recorded, and then an off-screen voice announces what it is supposed to be the sound of, and it's done a second time. It's fun to see on a fundamental level as exposing the kind of unceremonious but inventive technical work that takes place behind cinematic curtains of illusion.
But more marvelous is exemplifying the mechanism of that illusion that creates the imagined horror story in our mind — the second time the sound becomes the mental image just described to us. By making it so immediate, it's a powerful exhibit, observable in your own self, of the mind acquiring illusory images — the images become what the off- screen voice announces. Wickedly clever! Because it puts us in the protagonist's shoes, by introducing a disruptive level of imagination.
So I think you must see this at one point. Based on his previous film and now this, I have this filmmaker on my short list of talent that I expect he has it in him to be a leading voice a decade from now.
This is a movie that seems to have no purpose. The way that the sound effects were generated in the film is mildly interesting, and the xenophobia that the main character experienced made me believe that the storyline would go somewhere. However, this was not the case. Sitting through this, I found it hard to understand why the actors were even drawn to the material; it is so uninteresting. Technically the film has its merits, and it might be relevant for someone who has worked as a sound effects technician and editor in movies, but for the general population it is probably a waste of time. I know that it contains references to Italian horror movies of the 70's and 80's, but so what? My advice is to stay away.
The story on the other hand is confusing to say the least. But that is meant to be experienced like that. The question is if you are willing to enjoy the ride. You could also say it's a bit of style over content, though I'm sure the director must have a plan in mind and could explain it all to you.
The cast is great, the pace of the story on the other hand is really slow. Another factor that might make this unbearable to watch for some people. It's definitely a great look behind the scenes of sound making, whatever you think of the movie. Another great thing is that the movie can be watched a couple of times, so you could discover new little things in it.
The cast is great, the pace of the story on the other hand is really slow. Another factor that might make this unbearable to watch for some people. It's definitely a great look behind the scenes of sound making, whatever you think of the movie. Another great thing is that the movie can be watched a couple of times, so you could discover new little things in it.
There is a pressure associated with watching a film considered one of the best of its year; there is of course pressure on the film to live up to the hype but when it comes to smaller films such as this one then there is a certain amount of pressure on the viewer to be part of the people who "get it" and not one of the dullards who should just stick to blockbusters. Of course this is message board talk but it exists in the mind too and for sure I came to this film wanting to come out praising it. Indeed I felt this to the point that even as it ended I felt like I should have enjoyed it more and thus started to rationalize myself towards that position, but it isn't the case because while I appreciated aspects of this film, generally I found it pretty dull and lacking a sharp edge.
The plot is that a British sound engineer comes to Italy for a project and finds himself doing ADR and Foley for a film containing a lot of graphic violence; as he works he finds his grip on his sense slipping, with his days spent not understanding what is being said around him and acting out violent acts on vegetables while watching women be brutalized on film over and over again. The concept I am fine with and I liked the ideas in the plot of exposure to this material having an impact and I even enjoyed the slow burn of the horror, but it slow burnt its whole way to the end and really didn't deliver too much. It has some nice touches as the plot develops but the "inside a movie" thing feels trite and isn't developed enough here to stand up on its own. I was drawn into the built but then surprised by how little delivery there was at the other end.
Of course the one thing the film does great is the sound engineering. As my partner was studying upstairs, I watched this through a very good set of headphones and it added a lot to the film to be so immersed in the audio aspect. The violence of the sounds and the persistence of them is very engaging and involving, just as it is for the main character, although the screaming gets very old very quickly. The decision to have the majority of the dialogue in Italian without subtitles was an interesting one which cuts both ways; on one hand it disorientates the viewer as it does the main character, but then it does put more pressure on the feel of the film – which then doesn't deliver. The cast are solid, with Jones in good form throughout.
I did want to like it more than I did but while the sound and the slow burn pacing is engaging, it goes on too long and doesn't have enough in the way of development of delivery to really payoff at the end. Trust me, I wanted to go with the majority on this and be seen as one of the cool kids, but it really only worked for me up to a point.
The plot is that a British sound engineer comes to Italy for a project and finds himself doing ADR and Foley for a film containing a lot of graphic violence; as he works he finds his grip on his sense slipping, with his days spent not understanding what is being said around him and acting out violent acts on vegetables while watching women be brutalized on film over and over again. The concept I am fine with and I liked the ideas in the plot of exposure to this material having an impact and I even enjoyed the slow burn of the horror, but it slow burnt its whole way to the end and really didn't deliver too much. It has some nice touches as the plot develops but the "inside a movie" thing feels trite and isn't developed enough here to stand up on its own. I was drawn into the built but then surprised by how little delivery there was at the other end.
Of course the one thing the film does great is the sound engineering. As my partner was studying upstairs, I watched this through a very good set of headphones and it added a lot to the film to be so immersed in the audio aspect. The violence of the sounds and the persistence of them is very engaging and involving, just as it is for the main character, although the screaming gets very old very quickly. The decision to have the majority of the dialogue in Italian without subtitles was an interesting one which cuts both ways; on one hand it disorientates the viewer as it does the main character, but then it does put more pressure on the feel of the film – which then doesn't deliver. The cast are solid, with Jones in good form throughout.
I did want to like it more than I did but while the sound and the slow burn pacing is engaging, it goes on too long and doesn't have enough in the way of development of delivery to really payoff at the end. Trust me, I wanted to go with the majority on this and be seen as one of the cool kids, but it really only worked for me up to a point.
First and foremost it has to be recognised that the design and execution of the sound sequences in this film are outstanding. It's almost worth ninety minutes of your time just to listen to this film, the sound design is so good. It's also pretty satisfying if you have a fetish for old sound equipment – all those reel-to-reel tape decks and retro-futuristic signal generators and so on. From that point of view and from the sound perspective this film was absolutely up my street. Toby Jones as the lead could not be faulted and I would happily watch anything with him in it.
So what was wrong with it? Well it was sub-Lynchian without ever coming near to the pleasures and terrors of an actual David Lynch film. You can almost hear the director straining to hit the tone of a Lynch film and falling badly short every time. The script was at times very amusing but mostly it was just plain trivial or superficial. The story was incomprehensible, again not in a Lynch fashion where the very incomprehensibility adds to the mystery but in the fashion of someone striving for portentous but merely achieving pretentious.
It's worth seeing/hearing for the fantastic design but as a film it fails to engage and it fails to be half as clever as it thinks it is.
So what was wrong with it? Well it was sub-Lynchian without ever coming near to the pleasures and terrors of an actual David Lynch film. You can almost hear the director straining to hit the tone of a Lynch film and falling badly short every time. The script was at times very amusing but mostly it was just plain trivial or superficial. The story was incomprehensible, again not in a Lynch fashion where the very incomprehensibility adds to the mystery but in the fashion of someone striving for portentous but merely achieving pretentious.
It's worth seeing/hearing for the fantastic design but as a film it fails to engage and it fails to be half as clever as it thinks it is.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesThe title of the fictional studio refers to Cathy Berberian, the US soprano who married Luciano Berio, a pioneer of electronic music and a key influence on Strickland's film.
- Erros de gravaçãoAt the very beginning of the film, Elena calls Francesco to announce Gilderoy's arrival at the studio. Although the film is set in Italy, when she picks up the phone a continuous dial tone is heard, which is normal for the US or UK; however, the actual dial tone would have sounded very differently in Italy, a country where the phone system has a very distinctive and non-continuous dial tone (consisting of a 425Hz tone with a duration of 0.6sec followed by a 1 second pause, followed by a 0.2 sec tone then a 0.2 sec pause, repeated in a loop until the first digit is dialed).
- Citações
Giancarlo Santini: Gilderoy, this is going to be a fantastic film. Brutal and honest. Nobody has seen this horror before.
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditosThe opening credits are actually put together of those from The Equestrian Vortex, the fictional horror flick that's going to be post-dubbed in the movie, with fast-cut animations, medieval depictions of hell, demons, naves, animal skeletons and tortured female faces, mostly red and black colored.
- ConexõesFeatured in MsMojo: Top 10 Scary Movies to Watch If You Hate Horror (2023)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Berberian Sound Studio?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- Países de origem
- Centrais de atendimento oficiais
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- Phòng Thu Hắc Ám
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 38.493
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 6.605
- 16 de jun. de 2013
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 312.757
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 32 min(92 min)
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente