Jump to content
MadonnaNation.com Forums
Suedehead

In defence of Madonna's 'heavily edited' tour films...

Recommended Posts

DISCLAIMER: MDNA Tour is excluded from my assessment.

 

I know some fans prefer the live shows to be more faithful to the live experience - however, the tour DVD / film is supposed to promote the tour but also is a filmic depiction and an artistic contextualisation and reinterpretation in the editing suite in Madonna's part. So in that sense I can understand where she's coming from. She wants to project the show as she saw it in her head when she conceptualised it, or as she felt it when she was performing it. So in that sense, okay it makes sense and I think it's her prerogative as an artist. 

 

That being said, the Facetune that's out of control and the Autotune on the vocals are more difficult to swallow. And what's inexcusable really is the imbalance between her meticulous attention to detail when it comes to the visuals in contradistinction to the shockingly awful sound mixing and audio in general. 

 

Thoughts? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The audio is the worst thing about it. It is so condensed, and the vocals lack any kind of dynamic.

I really don't know what 2 think when people here say things like 'OMG I can't stop listening 2 the live album',

It's really quite embarrassing. I will say this though, it all sounds a lot better on a cinema system when

played really LOUD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, the worst part without a doubt is the audio mix...even the ballads/ acoustics where she's so good vocally, sound totally processed and flat.

The constant crowd noice is also very annoying...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the editing because it’s her creative vision. I’Ve even become a fan of most of the MDNA dvd. At first, I didn’t like it though. It grew on me a lot.

Have to agree about complaints regarding face tune & autotune. The mixing is an issue too.Hope it improves in future releases. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for visuals, I happen to like the stylization and the more cinematic look. I'm also nowhere near as bothered by fast-paced editing as some here. I do wish we could see more long/crane shots though.
As for the audio, that is the one area that I agree needs improvement. But that's not just in post-production...that also comes down to the musical direction itself, and bringing the band forward in the mix with more live cues. As for the tour films, less audience noise and a more 'live' sound could improve things immensely...and are very doable fixes.

I think the RHT release was an improvement on a few of these issues.

Overall though, I have no issue with her stylized, cinematic tour films. Considering that basically Youtube is full of footage from literally every show now, I understand her wanting to offer something unique as the official offering.  I do enjoy more 'traditional' edits as well...but I understand why she feels that doesn't fulfill her vision for these kinds of shows anymore. I do have to say, the first time I saw The Confessions Tour film, I was genuinely blown away. I had never seen a live show captured like that on film before. And over the years, I've started to see the influence of that style in other artists too.

 

 

 

ps. The one area she could easily improve is bonus features on the releases - put a selection of the best backdrop videos on there. It's such a no-brainer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, VogueMusic said:

As for visuals, I happen to like the stylization and the more cinematic look. I'm also nowhere near as bothered by fast-paced editing as some here. I do wish we could see more long/crane shots though.
As for the audio, that is the one area that I agree needs improvement. But that's not just in post-production...that also comes down to the musical direction itself, and bringing the band forward in the mix with more live cues. As for the tour films, less audience noise and a more 'live' sound could improve things immensely...and are very doable fixes.

I think the RHT release was an improvement on a few of these issues.

Overall though, I have no issue with her stylized, cinematic tour films. Considering that basically Youtube is full of footage from literally every show now, I understand her wanting to offer something unique as the official offering.  I do enjoy more 'traditional' edits as well...but I understand why she feels that doesn't fulfill her vision for these kinds of shows anymore. I do have to say, the first time I saw The Confessions Tour film, I was genuinely blown away. I had never seen a live show captured like that on film before. And over the years, I've started to see the influence of that style in other artists too.

 

 

 

ps. The one area she could easily improve is bonus features on the releases - put a selection of the best backdrop videos on there. It's such a no-brainer. 

+1 Agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't mind a few special effects on the Confessins DVD, or even as early as DWT. It started going a bit overboard with MDNA, and with Rebel Heart I think the effects were supposed to make up for the simpler stage effects.

Overall, I feel that the effects are always kind of similar, as different as the tours are, so it doesn't really make much sense to attribute it to some higher artistic purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What bothers me the most is the heavily edited vocals and the constant fake crowd noise. On the Girlie Show DVD it's so annoying!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, danorbit said:

What bothers me the most is the heavily edited vocals and the constant fake crowd noise. On the Girlie Show DVD it's so annoying!

Fake crowd noise yes. OMG I hate it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem with the visuals. So many YouTube video these days, fans could just turn to that. The audio, I agree, is horrible. I enjoy listening to the CT & S&S audio because I get transported to the actual show. MDNA & RHT are so flat. Even turning up the volume couldn't fix the listening experience. As a matter of fact, I don't even listen to the RHT audio, only for LFL because I love that remix. I can't be bothered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont understand the audio at all. how can anyone who listens to that enjoy it? it's not even just "flat", it's like Im listening to it while having hearing issues. it's all like depth, all the sounds, have been removed. how does M not hear that herself?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Nikki said:

i dont understand the audio at all. how can anyone who listens to that enjoy it? it's not even just "flat", it's like Im listening to it while having hearing issues. it's all like depth, all the sounds, have been removed. how does M not hear that herself?

Does it sound good on these little crappy smarphone ear buds though? I wouldn't know, but
mixing in this digital iTunes-crap age is quite different, I know that much (and why i hate it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was listening to soundboards from Madonna in Soundcloud this past week. I don't mind if she was out of tune or whatever, I enjoyed them because they are live and raw and natural and all in between.

I NEVER EVER listen to her live albums because they are fake, absurd and have zero interest to me. 

That says it all. 

And about the imagine flipping and epilepsy-inducing... Well, I still couldn't watch RHT till the end. I am surely an old fart, but I get dizzy and annoyed. I have watched several times the fan edited one that was in YouTube and I downloaded, that made by a fan having all the images around the world taken with HD phones. It has real voice and a normal editing. Thank you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be great if she added, as an extra, the REAL concert taken from the backdrop screens, with the real soundboard voice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, VogueMusic said:

As for visuals, I happen to like the stylization and the more cinematic look. I'm also nowhere near as bothered by fast-paced editing as some here. I do wish we could see more long/crane shots though.
As for the audio, that is the one area that I agree needs improvement. But that's not just in post-production...that also comes down to the musical direction itself, and bringing the band forward in the mix with more live cues. As for the tour films, less audience noise and a more 'live' sound could improve things immensely...and are very doable fixes.

I think the RHT release was an improvement on a few of these issues.

Overall though, I have no issue with her stylized, cinematic tour films. Considering that basically Youtube is full of footage from literally every show now, I understand her wanting to offer something unique as the official offering.  I do enjoy more 'traditional' edits as well...but I understand why she feels that doesn't fulfill her vision for these kinds of shows anymore. I do have to say, the first time I saw The Confessions Tour film, I was genuinely blown away. I had never seen a live show captured like that on film before. And over the years, I've started to see the influence of that style in other artists too.ps. The one area she could easily improve is bonus features on the releases - put a selection of the best backdrop videos on there. It's such a no-brainer. 

+1 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Suedehead said:

DISCLAIMER: MDNA Tour is excluded from my assessment.

 

I know some fans prefer the live shows to be more faithful to the live experience - however, the tour DVD / film is supposed to promote the tour but also is a filmic depiction and an artistic contextualisation and reinterpretation in the editing suite in Madonna's part. So in that sense I can understand where she's coming from. She wants to project the show as she saw it in her head when she conceptualised it, or as she felt it when she was performing it. So in that sense, okay it makes sense and I think it's her prerogative as an artist. 

 

That being said, the Facetune that's out of control and the Autotune on the vocals are more difficult to swallow. And what's inexcusable really is the imbalance between her meticulous attention to detail when it comes to the visuals in contradistinction to the shockingly awful sound mixing and audio in general. 

 

Thoughts? 

I've considered your defence very carefully.

Artsy fartsy conceptualization bollocks means nothing when the final product in technically inept, lacking in finesse and basic editing skills, and obviously intended to mask rather than reveal (in the case of RHT - the basic backdrops, the mediocre lighting design, the shrinking screens, the terrible band) and AGE of course. 

There's a reason the best directors use the best editors for their films. A lesson Madonna should have learned back when the pros were prepping Truth or Dare for theatrical release.

Madonna and you are therefore GUILTY of ensuring that reels of wonderful footage that could create immersive viewing experiences and lasting testaments to those shows instead turn into bastardised showreels resembling something akin to these horrble Elvis/Roy Orbison HOLOGRAM tours doing the rounds - all fantasy over reality, style over substance.

I herebye sentence you to LIFE. LIFE imprisonment.

A lifetime of hard labour watching The MDNA Tour Blu on repeat until your eyes fall out of their sockets.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RHT audio is the worst 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, spotlight said:

RHT audio is the worst 

Nope, that is MDNA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree , i think she became rather cheap by not having the best concert film directors out there to film and edit. Instead she hired people within her team and they lack the objective view of herself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't mind a heavily edited piece, if there is some kind of vision behind it.
I take it 4 what it is, but it has 2 make sense...4 example SFH on DWT.

CT, far from my favourite, actually captures the vibe of the album and it's very well done.

And as far as good fakery is concerned, I'm totally on board 4 the Sticky Edit.
It's quite surprising that it actually captured the stadium vibe in a dynamic way.

But overall I agree with @Kim and I think at this point its 'age' that clouds her judgement.
The effects r just filters now, plain and simple...way too repetitive.

The Audio remains the most disturbing thing imo, I listened 2 IGTTYAS the other day
and I was shocked that sth I didn't like at the time, sounds almost natural compared 2 what she puts
out 2day, even the crowd noise on tracks like AL...

I know I'm old and boring, but I feel that a proper live band would change A LOT. And turn up those
backing singers instead of using some fucking pre recorded backing track. Get rid of the screens, build proper sets
instead and hire some avant garde theatre person 2 direct the lighting. Now that would b a Re-invention in this day an age,
where everyone uses the same back drops and techniques.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at this, basically the Madonna equivalent of what we consider 2 b lazy :lol: (waves at Janice)
but it's fucking real.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, acko said:

I really don't mind a heavily edited piece, if there is some kind of vision behind it.
I take it 4 what it is, but it has 2 make sense...4 example SFH on DWT.

CT, far from my favourite, actually captures the vibe of the album and it's very well done.

And as far as good fakery is concerned, I'm totally on board 4 the Sticky Edit.
It's quite surprising that it actually captured the stadium vibe in a dynamic way.

But overall I agree with @Kim and I think at this point its 'age' that clouds her judgement.
The effects r just filters now, plain and simple...way too repetitive.

The Audio remains the most disturbing thing imo, I listened 2 IGTTYAS the other day
and I was shocked that sth I didn't like at the time, sounds almost natural compared 2 what she puts
out 2day, even the crowd noise on tracks like AL...

I know I'm old and boring, but I feel that a proper live band would change A LOT. And turn up those
backing singers instead of using some fucking pre recorded backing track. Get rid of the screens, build proper sets
instead and hire some avant garde theatre person 2 direct the lighting. Now that would b a Re-invention in this day an age,
where everyone uses the same back drops and techniques.
 

She needs to just have a good clear out. Back in the day she didn't seem to have any qualms about switching things up completely from one era to the next. I know that settling into a routine as one gets older is somewhat inevitable, but she would really benefit by bringing in new blood, or even old blood. For someone who used to seek out the best in the business for all her endeavours, it's baffling why she sticks with some of the... frankly, mediocre talent that makes up her creative team these days. Sort it out Madge!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think she needs to find a balance between the old style BAT/GS days and the quick edit/special effects of MDNA/RH. It does feel "harder" trying to watch RH with the constant edits. I think CT got it pretty right visually but she hasn't had good "audio" since GS probably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even Bowies live albums, Ziggy Stardust, Stage & David Live 1974, have a very canned, stately & tinny sound. And that was an era where
an actual live album was somewhat popular. And like KISS' live album, ALIVE, which was a proper hit back in the day, they have
major overdubs, from isntrumentation to the (backing) vocals etc.., same with Prince's SOTT. (sidenote with the KISS thing,
the inlay pictures of the crowd & fans were actually taken at another groups gig, no wonder Gene Simons is a Gaga fan :lol: )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I LOVE the heavily edited Confessions Tour but I can't stand the heavily edited MDNA and RH Tours. Why is that? I don't know but Confessions was new, exciting and it just somehow looks more professionally done. The editing also isn't as excessive as on the last two tours. I agree that RH is better than MDNA (although I do love the black/white shot Love Spent which everyone seems to hate) but not by much. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×