It's better than everybody else is saying

Any additional comments?

Every other review mentions the normal noises the narrator makes and it just isn't as big a deal as everybody else is making it to be. Listening to the book is a perfectly fine experience; the content is superb if you're interested in the history of cinema.

8 personnes ont trouvé cela utile

Great, but offensive sound throughout

Great author and book, but if you're listening whith an ipod and you find drinking, cotten mouth and swalling offensive, you're going to have a hard time. How could such a good book receive such a poor recording?

7 personnes ont trouvé cela utile

Great info, but author should watch mouth noises

This is great info, and I am learning a lot. But, I have a real pet peeve about mouth noises (saliva or lack thereof), swallowing. The microphone picks up everything and well, it's a little gross, to be honest. Like I said, he's great, but the noises and swallowing are getting in the way of my total enjoyment. It could be remedied with hydration or pulling away from the mic when he pauses to swallow.

5 personnes ont trouvé cela utile

As a mini-course: just fine

I think this audio program gets a very bad rap. It's not a book, it's a little course or series of lectures. And as such, it's well recorded, very easy to understand, interesting, and well worth your time if you're interested in the subject.

All of the reviews pointing out the mouth noises, etc. as being "too distracting" or taking stars off because of that, either have ever heard recordings of lectures but how much were found on this, or expecting a professional reader reading a book.

This is not that. it's a very interesting course, put together, and read by the professor himself. It serves it's purpose well, and if you find the subject interesting, you will not have a problem with the so-called "mouth noises" or whatever.

Highly recommended for aficionados, fans, students of film and filmmakers

3 personnes ont trouvé cela utile

Hard-swallower

This book delivers what it advertises. It serves as a great history of film and is presented by a very intelligent lecturer who offers great insight into each film as well as show how it contributes to each period of film. However, the presentation has one fatal flaw: the lecturer continuously hard-swallows right into the microphone. This becomes so distracting, that it is hard to pay attention to the lectures after a while. Perhaps hire a professional voice man next time, or a least some recording etiquette training for the lecturer.

3 personnes ont trouvé cela utile

Enthusiastic but lacking...

Professor Shargel delivery is passionate and joyous. Unfortunately, halfway through, this scholar lost me. As he presents "Casablanca" and "Now, Voyager", he mentions the name of Jerry's daughter in the latter as "June". JUNE!? Any self-respecting fan of "Now, Voyager" knows the girl's name was Tina!!! June was the name of Charlotte's niece (portrayed by Bonita Granville), not Jerry Durrance's daughter!

3 personnes ont trouvé cela utile

Great information/passion. Obnoxious mouth noises.

What made the experience of listening to Understanding Movies: The Art and History of Film the most enjoyable?

The information, really. The narrator seemed to be passionate about the material.

What did you like best about this story?

A lot of information presented with excitement in a digestible way.

Would you listen to another book narrated by the narrator?

Only if he can get a handle on his mouth noises. Or an editor cut them out.

Was this a book you wanted to listen to all in one sitting?

No.

Any additional comments?

Between the narrator and whoever produced or quality checked the audio, someone should have said something about the mouth noises and swallowing. Obnoxious and really distracting, which is a shame because the information and passion is there.

2 personnes ont trouvé cela utile

Educational! But ...the mike's too close!

What about the narrator’s performance did you like?

Mr. Shargel is a passionate and charismatic lecturer, compelling to listen to. But he's a hard swallower, I must admit. But anyway, if you're interested in film studies, don't hesitate to buy it.

2 personnes ont trouvé cela utile

Great Movie Primer

Would you listen to Understanding Movies: The Art and History of Film again? Why?

I would listen to this audible book again because I think it deserves multiple listening to fully appreciate the subject.

What other book might you compare Understanding Movies: The Art and History of Film to and why?

This is more a film history book and fits into the Modern Scholar Library. I haven't listened to a book on this subject that is comparable.

Which character – as performed by the narrator – was your favorite?

People have complained about the Narrator. I will say at first I did notice his "small" speech peculiarities but really it was not that bad and the subject interested me enough that it was no big deal. I honestly feel if you like films and want to know more about film history this is a great addition to your library. If you don't, well you will complain about the narrator.

Was there a moment in the book that particularly moved you?

This really isn't applicable to this book.

1 personne a trouvé cela utile

If you like Siskel and Ebert then...maybe.

I picked up this book to compliment a college course i'm taking called "Movies and Meaning". I was hoping that it would help explain some of the terms of the art and history of film such as lighting and camera perspective along with film noir and auter in yet another way to help reinforce the classroom learning.

What I got instead was a film critic review of films through different time periods. Despite having a title and subject that is for beginners, the terms that the author did use were not explained before use and assumed a level of knowledge before listening.

The author made comments about the films subject matter based on his understanding of the film industry at the time and not the films subject matter. He butchered the review of INDIANA JONES and STAR WARS to the point where it seems that his review was based on a poorly written article about the films. If he was actually talking about the art and history of films where he focused on the making of the movies and the film industry at the time, then maybe. Instead, he was actually reviewing the film subject matter like a film critic.

1 personne a trouvé cela utile