Sound in film is something that I think not a lot of people discuss. Not that it doesn’t get noticed or recognized, but I don’t often see a lot of insight or admiration for this kind of stuff and I really appreciate the ability to have an avenue to share some of my views and interest in the subject.
The inclusion of sound in film was nothing less than groundbreaking. It is literally adding an entirely new sensory element to a medium that strives on its attributes of realism. Imagine dancing without music. Undoubtedly, it is a great achievement to have the talent and skills to do so - but with music included, the roles of both the dancer and the spectator are enhanced. It becomes an entirely different experience altogether.
The synchronization of the three types of sound: dialogue, sound effects, and music when done right, work together to create a more tangible reality. Sound, I believe, is just another necessary bridge that brings us closer to a more immersive experience in the filmscape. The dubbed “fourth” type of sound, which isn’t talked about much, is silence. With the introduction of sound, people had to learn not only when it is right to include sound, but equally as important, when it is NOT. Every bit of what is and isn't heard only reinforces what is on the screen.
I am continuously fascinated by the role sound performs in the world of a film. Going by this notion, I found an article titled, “THE NON-DIEGETIC FALLACY: FILM, MUSIC, AND NARRATIVE SPACE.”
Written by Ben Winters, he discusses the nature of diegetic & non-diegetic sound and how the diegesis of a film is much more complex than we might realize. He views the diegesis as more of a “narrative space” rather than categorized into a “narrative level.” He sheds light on the fact that music, more often than not, is distinctive and “specific to a particular film,” emphasizing its crucial role inside the diegesis (rather than existing outside.) He critiques the role of cinema as a realistic medium, by labeling this ideology as an assumption, not a fact - a mistake. He compares this to the same way people incorrectly label any music the characters do not hear, as lying outside of the narrative space and a sure indicator of an external narrative level. This is an assumption, not a fact - a mistake. Winters covers numerous films in his article, two of the most notable are Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008) and Saving Private Ryan (1998) as examples of films with scores that are inseparable from the image.
I think it is important to go over these varying degrees of opinion around sound’s part in the “narrative space” (as coined by Winters) of a film. By learning these different aspects, you dive deeper into the intent behind why sound is included and in turn how it is applied.
In finding and reading this article, it has come to my belief that the theory behind sound in film should be appreciated more. The inclusion of sound in film highlights almost a century of progress in the way films have evolved since then. I may be biased since I wasn’t born before 1927 and I have two amazing acoustic devices attached to my head, but damn me if I don’t happen to love sound.
I watched a video a long while back, but it essentially said that sound was 70% of a film. Now that might be a little bit exaggerated, but with that being said I do have one question for you: Would you rather sit through and watch an entire film on mute or listen to its entirety without the visuals?