Sidney - Synopsis and development

I am working on a 3rd year BA Film project called Sidney, as post production sound editor.

Edward Hardwicke as Sidney

This film is directed by Gareth Warland and produced by Noelle Rodrigues.

A brief synopsis of the film is as follows (courtesy of Gareth's and Noelles's website allmyfriendscollection.com):

The film tells the story of a World War II veteran, Sidney, who experienced time in the Far East. Due to deteriorating physical health, he now lives in a care home in the remote English countryside. When Yoshio, a new Japanese carer begins working at the home, Sid finds his arrival difficult to digest. As he attempts to come to terms with Yoshio′s presence days before the celebration of his 90th Birthday, he finds it difficult to form an understanding of his emotions.

The story aims to visualise a number of pre-conceptions and stereotypes of generations, past and present. As the story develops and new understandings are formed, the film becomes a canvas of perception, whereby the characters and the audience question each other's perspective. The result will create a self-reflective piece of work, emphasizing the term 'people are a product of what they experience.

The film will be screened at the British Film Institute in London and entered in to a number of Film Festivals around the world. allmyfriends will use Sidney as a starting point for future productions, already in development.

In conversations with the director Gareth, the idea was for the film to be realistic in its aesthetic. All the dialogue would be recorded on location (no Automatic Dialogue Replacement - ADR), there would be no musical soundtrack beyond any music that was not diegetic. The sound effects would also be recorded on location, as much as was possible to give a naturalistic sound track that matched the location. In traditional Hollywood codes of dramatic realism, the dialogue would have to be recorded as cleanly as possible and given the most prominence within the sound mix. When no dialogue was present, the sound effects recorded would then match the point of view (POV) of the camera. Gareth also wanted the film to also shift its aesthetic during specific scenes so that the film contained a reflexive element, i.e. occasional glimpses at the camera. With this choice, Gareth intended, the audience to become aware of their involvement as voyeurs.

In terms of sound design, there is one particular scene where the point of view of the audience is transported inside the head of Sidney, this takes place when Sidney is alone in his bedroom, Sidney's internalised thoughts impose themselves on the soundscape and in this moment the audience is asked to empathise with Sidney's emotions. This is the only scene where the conventions of the sound in the film change dramatically.


Filming took place on location in Sutton, Surrey, at a disused care home called Bawtree House. The film shoot lasted 6 days from 12th December until the 18th December, 2009.

Even though I principally joined the project to work on the post production side of the film, I was really interested in helping out on location (in what ever capacity I could), as I thought it would give me an insight in to how a film is made and would also help me get a feel for the film and take the experience and knowledge I had gained in to the post sound work I would do.

I was already aware that Gareth had a friend who would be doing the sound recording on location (Jeremy Brown - Jez), however, there was the chance that Jez might not be available for the first two days of the shoot, however, a contingency plan had been put in place should this arise.

Closer to the first day of shooting, Jez was unable to make the first two days of shooting, therefore, I was asked to help with the sound recording on these days. I was. I admit, very nervous about this responsibility as I had never worked as a sound recordist, or boom operator, on a film shoot and from some of the books that I had read, and from the experiences recounted to me by some of my course mates, I was concerned that, in all honesty, I'd be useless. Together with Joel Bennett (who is also the film editor) we were able to capture all the necessary sound recordings, in good quality, from the shots that took place on those two days. We did have to do numerous wild tracks of the shots, however, because the sound of the film being fed through the camera (as it was shot on film rather than digital) was evident in the sound recordings.

Much to their credit, the organisers of the schedule for the shoot ensured that on the first two days of filming, no dialogue recording was required. What Joel and I recorded, (Joel, mainly as boom operator, and myself as sound recordist) were the sound effects and ambiance of Sidney interacting with various furniture in his bedroom and also walking up and down stairwells and through corridors. The recordings in the bedroom were close miked and wildtracked in order to get clean recordings and also to match the intimacy of the camera shots. The recordings in the corridors and stairwells were recorded from the POV of the camera, thus, these were also wildtracked due to the proximity of the microphone to the camera during takes.

From days 3 to 6, Jez was principle boom operator, on location. He was very experienced in working on location and he was a real asset to have, as he understood the difficulties in recording location dialogue and also the codes of on-location politics. Whilst Jez was operating the boom, I was asked to take charge of the recording and mixing of the audio signals to ensure that the dialogue was recorded as cleanly as possible with the correct signal to noise ratio, and also ensuring that there were no peaks in the dynamics so that the signals did not distort.

It was really interesting to discover the many ways in which Jez ensured that dialogue could be recorded as cleanly as possible. Depending on the shot, whether close or far, along with the boom mic practice, plant mics were used, as well as radio mics.

Once all of the scenes had been shot, Joel and I recorded wild tracks of any sound effects that could not be filmed during the shoot, either because of the danger of the sounds effects overlapping with the dialogue or because of the proximity of the camera to the action. These included wild tracks of doors opening and closing, myself acting as Sidney struggling in and out of his chair with the aid of his walking stick, walking with a zimmer frame, and Sidney shaving at his sink.

All dialogue and effects were recorded in mono, this is because principle dialogue is intended to be centre in the mix and sound effects are intended to be positioned within the stereo field.

Once all of the crew had left, at the end of the shoot, I recorded room tones and ambiances, of all the locations used within the shoot, in stereo to add space and dimension to the mix, so that when it came to editing the various sounds, there would be an underlying ambiance to mask any cuts.

Deciding to help out on location was a very good decision. I was very surprised with the amount of work, effort, planning and time it takes to shoot a film. There were nearly 40 crew members involved in the shooting of the film, and it was an absolute pleasure to work with them. The shoot was incredibly well organised, there were very few hiccups and everyone worked professionally and tirelessly. Being involved with the recording of the sound, on location has also been invaluable in my post production duties, as I was able to make notes of any areas where sound might have been an issue once editing got underway. Being on location helped me to plan and then record wildtracks of sounds that would have been difficult to record in Foley sessions.

The film is currently being edited by Joel and Gareth, and once the editing of the footage has been finalised, I will then start the sound post production task of ensuring that the dialogue is mixed and edited so that cuts are as transparent as possible, and also add ambient sounds, edit the effects and also work with Gareth on recording the television programs that Sidney watches, within a few of the scenes.

Thoughts on sound for Broken Bottles

taking the sounds home, another location. structure, man made, playing with the space, internal external, use the sounds recorded as guide? to inflect my own subjective take. Reflexivity, my own fumblings?

EQ the sounds to start to clarify?

Elephant & Castle Sound Collage

I decided to create a 5 minute collage of all the sounds I recorded around Elephant & Castle on my first day "out in the field". Have a listen.



Elephant & Castle Collage by AudioHive

What is interesting is because the sound track immediately establishes itself as an urban soundscape, one expects a bustling and chaotic sound environment, all of the sounds do seem to knit together and sound like all the same recording. This soundscape is in fact 20 seperate segments, this only becomes apparent when sounds suddenly drop out or appear suddenly, this I commented on at the bottom of my previous post Cut & Paste. All of these sounds were also recorded in mono, so I panned the multiple tracks in different directions to give the illusion of space.

The sounds recorded are fom various locations in the area; the roundabout, the underpasses, the market, inside the shopping centre, the train station, the underground station, the foyer and atrium of LCC and the LCC tower block.

Cut & Paste - Editing the City's Voice

Here is a short experiment in which I have taken a number of the recordings i have made at Elephant & Castle and cut out all of the segments where instances of sounds with sharp attacks occur. These I have clumped together, and the sound files they are taken from are left with the gaps exposed.

Cut & Paste by AudioHive

These sonic punctuations and accents are for me, the real rhythm of the city sound scape, these are the sounds that break through the hum and get themselves heard. They remind me of watching wildlife documentaries where the explorers visit jungles, and all the animals that live there are screaming and shouting to communicate their presence, all with their own distinct calls.
By cutting and pasting these elements so that they all occur within a very short space of time, it's interesting that it becomes very difficult to establish the causal nature of these sounds, and in a tip to Pierre Schaeffer's desire for reduced listening, what I hear in these short bursts, now cut out of context with the narrative they naturally occurred in, are their sonic characteristics rather than their visual accompaniment. However, I do confess that I already know what was the cause of these sounds and as Michel Chion points out in his book Audio-Vision:

At the same time, Schaeffer thought the acousmatic situation could encourage reduced listening, in that it provokes one to separate oneself from causes or effects in favor of consciously attending to sonic textures, masses, and velocities. But, on the contrary, the opposite often occurs, at least at first, since the acousmatic situation intensifies causal listening in taking away the aid of sight. Confronted with a sound from a loudspeaker that is presenting itself without a visual calling card, the listener is led all the more intently to ask, "What's that?" (i.e., "What is causing this sound?") and to be attuned to the minutest clues (often interpreted wrong anyway) that might help to identify the cause.

Also, considering the sounds I produce will be to compliment the visuals in a film, this avenue of exploration is probably not beneficial becasue the audience will automatically create their own relationships and synch points between image and sound, even with the sound being asynchronous.

However, I do think that by editing the sounds in such a fashion, I can draw greater attention to their presence. Another interesting thing is that these sounds, when removed from the sound recordings, are not conspicuous by their absence, what is noticed is a pause, but you couldn't guess what was missing. That's an interesting thought about this experiment, I can remove and substitute sounds, and if delicately done, could construct a soundtrack, completely artificially. Hold on...more thought there, traditional movies do this all the time, their soundtracks are completely fabricated.

Field Recordings - Mono Vs Stereo Vs Binaural

For my initial sound recording sessions around Elephant & Castle I've been using the Sennheiser K6/ME66 super-cardiod microphone unit to capture monaural recordings.

I wanted to use this microphone with the conscious knowledge that this "short gun" style of microphone was quite adept at reducing off axis sound. With this microphone I intended to try and focus in on my subject and try and erase any unwanted background sound.

This method, I hoped, would help alleviate the problems that I would tend to face when just using the built in omni-directional XY stereo pairing on my Zoom H4 Handy portable recorder.

Firstly, the Zoom H4, whilst a fairly competitively priced little machine that has served me quite well over the last two years on numerous Uni projects, is compact, discrete and portable, using the built in XY stereo microphones outdoors, in even the slightest breeze is a fucking disaster! What on earth were the designers of this poor little alopecia sufferer thinking of when they made the useless afro-cum-"Red Nose Day" foam wig to reduce wind buffering? It's absolutely useless, and renders the device's built in mics redundant for recording sound out in the field.

I've resorted to various methods to try and reduce this, including putting two pairs of socks over the end and also my beanie. The beanie was actually pretty successful at reducing wind buffering, however, by doing this, the depth of the recording is constricted and the resultant sound does indeed sound like it is recorded through material. I have yet been able to find a suitable, professionally made alternative.

Also, recording in an urban environment, with a heavy stream of traffic passing through, the omni-directionality of the built in microphones means that its pretty cosmopolitan in the sounds that it'll accept, i.e. its a right slag.

Hence the flirtation with the beautifully engineered and snobby German ME66. (along with a shock cradle and Rycote Softie. Now, I'd taken on board, when researching and subsequently filming on location with the film Sidney the fact that mono mics are used within the industry for recording dialogue and sound effects, so that they can be positioned within the audio mix. Therefore, when out investigating sounds for Broken Bottles with a view of recording only interesting sounds, I was treating this practice in the same way, mono recording, in nice and close, and trying my best to cancel out any unwanted sound. The truth is, for Broken Bottles this idea was not very effective. The sounds I was recording were not giving me the characteristics of depth and space that I had been accustomed to when recording in stereo, I persevered in the hope that I could isolate interesting sounds, and then through the editing process, position these sounds within the audio mix to give the soundtrack to Broken Bottles a sense of space. What I found, however, was that it was not individual sounds, isolated from the rest of the sounds in the environment around Elephant & Castle that were producing interesting results, but rather the interplay different, fleeting sounds that would suddenly emerge from all around me. Capturing these sounds in mono produced results that lost the excitement of the original event; all sounds recorded being mixed into one channel, with a lot of the identity of the sounds lost in the process due to the subsequent lack of depth to the recording, where all similar frequencies would be bunched together, therefore "muddying" the recording.

Mono, for out door (or on location) recording, unless recording something as specific as dialogue, or a specific sound effect that is required to be flexible to be positioned within an audio mix, is an ineffective choice. I was still pleased with the off axis cancellation and so enquired as to the possibility of a "short gun" microphone with stereo capabilities. They don't exist, I am naive.

I decided, therefore, to get a pair of binaural microphones out from the Sound stores office. I'd used them before and was extremely impressed with the reproduction of three dimensional space when listened back to on headphones. I went for a sound walk around Elephant & Castle with them and Oh my! I'd honestly forgotten just how fantastic these bad boys are. Oh yes, as much as I have been harping on about how Elephant & Castle doesn't have any interesting sounds, and what not, suddenly, I was absolutely in aural bliss, and this was even before I listened back to the recordings. There's something psychological about putting microphones in to your ears. I swear, I was listening so much more intently to the sonic environment than I was when I was holding the ME66 in my hand. Perhaps, it was the physical connection of the microphones to my ears, I was fully conscious of their presence, and so I was constantly reminded that this was my purpose whilst walking around; TO RECORD SOUND. Wearing the binaural microphones, I also felt a greater urge to investigate different spacial differences with sound, so I found myself going inside and outside buildings, just because I knew that spatially, this would get great results, as the acoustics and reverberations dampened and expanded.

Wunderbar!

I'll upload examples of what I'm rambling about, soon.

The Dilemma of Sound in Broken Bottles

As I have already mentioned in a previous post, I am at the point where I do not believe that the recordings I have, at present, work within the context of Broken Bottles. I am at the stage of considering using effects processing and audio manipulation of the sound recordings in order to produce results that will better suit the aesthetic choices of the film.


Gary has stated that he wants the film to have a "dream-like" quality and be "unsettling" in parts. I do still want to be sensitive to the original material that I have recorded and I am concerned that if I process the sounds, they will lose their identities and then I would ask myself the question, is it even necessary to include recorded sounds of the area at all? If they are going to be so coloured by technological manipulation. And what of introducing sounds that are not field recordings? or recordings that I have made?


I set out to find what sounds are interesting, to me, what are unexpected, and in having found very little of real interest in my recordings, nothing which really speaks of the area, nothing with a real identity, I am now trying to reconcile the use of effects processing in order to create something unique sounding.


I have already started using contact microphones and a telephone pick up coil in order to increase the variety and palette of my recordings, these I feel are justifiable because they are still recording what is already present.

I have also changed my stance, when recording sounds, from an observer, to actively interacting with the environment. By striking and knocking against objects and surfaces I am actively creating sound so as to capture it. This change I decided upon is because I felt the need to explore the area not just by listening to it, but by participating with it. This area is an urban area, built by man, its an area where people interact with it every day, all of the sounds I recorded were man made, I could hear none of the natural world, save for the scraping of dead leaves on the ground. So why not manipulate it? Why not make my own man made sounds?

So now thinking of technology; Elephant & Castle is a fabrication, a construction built with human technology, full of concrete, steel and glass. So why not take the raw elements that I have and create a construction that whilst using natural ingredients, is in the end a manufactured product?

And what of introducing sounds that are not recordings I have made of the area? What about artificial sounds? electronic sounds that I create at home? How do I justify doing this? What if a sound that I have, that is completely unrelated to Elephant & Castle, fits the idea, the impression of what the film is about, much more effectively than a sound I have recorded in the area? Is this cheating? They do this in films all the time. Some sounds sound better than the real sound does, in evoking the emotional response the film maker wants. My previous post about Gary Rydstrom's work on Saving Private Ryan, is an example of creatively "cheating" with the sound of the bullets underwater, in order to get the desired effect. This is a film, that for its battle sequences has been commended by war veterans for its realism.

An example of the emotional response that a sound track can evoke is with the below recording.

First Composition for BB by AudioHive

This recording is pretty much devoid of any effects processing or manipulation, save for a little bit of delay effect, however, Gary (the director) on Broken Bottles responded that it sounded "doomy". This segment is made up of contact microphone recordings, with me knocking on surfaces, and by simply presenting this as a piece for the soundtrack to the film, this sound track is already inflected with the emotional response of the audience. That contact microphone recordings are very susceptible to low frequency vibrations, and through cultural influence and quite probable primal nature, one can't help but get the impression that there is an ominous identity to this piece. So even through choice, or not, assumptions as to the intent of the film-maker will always be drawn, by the audience.

I will try processing and manipulating the sound for Broken Bottles but I will have to be very careful with my choices. As I begin, I will document my decisions.

Chris Marker - La Jetée & Sans Soleil

Gary (the director of Broken Bottles) gave me Chris Marker's film Sans Soleil to watch for inspiration with regards to how the soundtrack is constructed. The sounds in this film are amazing, a blend of electronic sounds, musique concrete, documentary sound and analogue manipulation. See the below clip:



The sounds in this film add a very "dream like" quality to the visual footage, and with the addition on the soundtrack of the narrator reading out correspondence from letters received, this gives the film, in my mind, the impression of a friend recounting a story of being on holiday, and you only have the words of your friend to guide you as to the description of a location, and with the words, you start to imagine the location and it's not quite tactile and fleshed out but it's an impression of a place.

It's quite a coincidence that I had only recently watched Chris Marker's other celebrated work La Jetée. Whilst reading William Whittington's excellent book Sound Design & Science Fiction Whittington devotes a section of the book within the chapter "Sound Montage" to La Jetée and talks about how the codes in this film go against the traditional naturalised codes of cinema, at that time. This film is almost entirely comprised of still shots (you could say photographs) accompanied by voice overs, sparse sound effects and music. I couldn't find a good quality example with english subtitles on Youtube. However, you can certainly appreciate the construction of the film and how different it is to conventional movies, even without understanding the dialogue. It's a great film, try and find youself a copy.



A lot of the shots in Broken Bottles remind me of La Jetée. Mainly because the shots in Broken Bottles, whilst not photographs, are static and are in some instances framing subjects that exhibit very subtle movements, if any. This also gives the opportunity for the audience to study and investigate a shot in much greater detail and really explore the content on screen.