Is THIS Hollywood's BIGGEST auto tune fail? 

Yeah, but they dubbed other great actresses (The King & I, My Fair Lady, West Side Story (all dubbed with the same singer, btw, the great Marni Nixon))... even actors and actresses who COULD sing and were trained, when they were very clearly chosen for their name and not their voice. They wanted big names with amazing acting AND amazing singing... not just one or the other.

@@cacvpc Agreed. The studios very carefully crafted stars images. A star couldn't have any imperfections - and that included vocal ability. If they couldn't sing, their singing voice wasn't suitable for their image or strong enough they dubbed them. Rita Haworth (for example) had to look like Rita Hayworth, act and behave a certain way and sing they way the studio thought Rita Hayworth should sound to maintain that image. There were three or four major dub performers - both for men and women and they were so fantastic there performances were pretty close to perfect.

Lol, nice analogy. Also, formaldehyde is highly toxic and a known carcinogen, which also fits into the metaphor.

You must be a trained analogy maker

It's not just actor vs trained singer. They do train the actors to sing. The problem is, that training is maybe six months, and they're being trained on the songs they're going to sing. The actor then only knows those songs, and hasn't built any of the range or experience necessary to fill out the song and give it that musical sound that it needs.

Haha..that is the best analogy I've ever heard. Going to try and memorize it, and fit it into a normal conversation, lol..hope you don't mind... I'll start by saying, " A great woman once said...

Take a look at his video with Pavarotti. It's excellent. Or have you already seen it?

@@EbonyPope Have not seen that one yet. Still working through past videos. Thanks for the heads up. I am a Pavarotti fan.

@@oldtimer1102 Yeah take a look. He took a warmup exercise from Pavarotti as an example.

@@EbonyPope !!!! Link?

@@SveinOlavGlesaaenNyberg Look through his channel dude. You'll find it. I have no link.

Me too. Very funny!

@@brianwhittington5086 Those are annoying, but the ones that show up right in the MIDDLE of a RU-vid music video drive me crazy.

😂

@@brianwhittington5086 Oh no! That's merciless!

Ad blockers work well. Get one.

Feels Good Man...You said it very well and spoke a key point: "...auto-tune, pitch correction is taking away a singer's INDIVIDUAL VOCAL PERSONALITY..." Bravo....yes, it is a great singer's own unique vocal "personality" and warmth and their own emotions that they bring to a song that makes them unique and identifiable. When I hear a great pre-auto-tune singer, I am listening and interacting with the vocals with my emotions and everything in my life's experiences. Auto-tune does a good job at sterilizing that interaction.

Thats why I LOATHE "Celtic Women".... To my ear, they are all inter-changeable... Due to AUTO-TUNE. grrrrrrr They ALL sound alike. Ackkkk

Yep, Paige is still knocking about, get her to 'assist'.

I thought actors do get singing lessons, dont they? Ok perhaps she never took acting classes

In classic cinema that was a tried and true method.... Leslie Caron in Gigi, Audrey Hepburn in My Fair Lady, among others were all dubbed by the late great Marnie Nixon

"She can act" Am doubt.

Or they could have just cast a singer

Right? Just hire an actual, trained singer and make sure to credit them. I know they used to try and keep it as secret as possible, but I never saw the point. Not everyone is a good singer. I can't carry a tune in a bucket, personally.

Thanks!

It's really glaring on those big interval jumps, which are hard for singers to nail, and you can see in the uncorrected version that she approaches a note from above or below and kind of rounds into it. Emma skips from note to note like they are keys on a piano rather than, say, a wind instrument or violin where there is a bit of natural portamento.

Thanks!

Dagmar S....Yes, and even decades earlier with the great musicals and live theatre. I was a kid in the 50's with my mother taking me to see the great Rogers & Hammerstein musicals of Oklahoma, South Pacific, Carousel and having the albums that I would spend hours listening to and singing along with at home. And then Leonard Bernstein's West Side Story, and then so many other great musicals. And all done without auto-tune. And yes, some of the leading ladies & men had their voices dubbed ( perhaps some needed but some not needed; it was just a bad habit that Hollywood got caught up into doing ), but dubbed is still a natural voice. Absolutely, Dagmar...what a nice way to get spoiled!!

@@marbleman52 Wasn't just referring to musicals from the past but also to classic rock.

@@dagmar.6954 Oh, I agree with that too; I wasn't meaning to exclude any other of the great music from those earlier years. I just got focused on the musicals...sorry. I turned 21 in 1973, so I was at a great age to have so much of my early adult life surrounded with so many fantastic bands and solo artists whose music has well earned the title of "Classic". I had a very nice component system back then and to really listen to the great bands on a real good turntable and good speakers ( head-phones too), was like being in the studio with them; you hear things that just do not come through the radio.

I use antlers in all of my decorating!

There is no fun to be had with Lee or Clint in the stupendously awful Paint Your Wagon.

@@marthawelch4289 Why do u say that?

@@Moonflowers11 Hi, Liz! I usually love musicals. I think the musical highlights of my life were the stage versions of Camelot with Richard Burton, The King and I with Yul Brynner, and Phantom of the Opera with Michael Crawford. In 1969, when I was 15, I did not see the movie musical, Paint Your Wagon. As I remember, it was not "Mom-approved", one reason being the existence of a song called "They Call the Wind Mariah" which was my mother's absolute least favorite song EVER. Why? I don't know. She was very affected by music and could cry or get angry or be super happy after just a few notes. Decades later Paint Your Wagon was on TV, TCM I believe. My then-husband was out of town so I controlled the remote and started watching. The "bigness" of the movie screen version's western panoramas was lost on TV. In so far as the stars of the movie, I am generally a fan of Lee Marvin and a very selective fan of Clint Eastwood. Jean Seburg was known to me through her French movie appearances and Harve Presnell had starred with the Energizer Bunny, the extremely vivacious Debbie Reynolds, in a good stage presentation of Annie Get Your Gun that I had attended with my parents. Other than Presnell, the major stars of the movie were not known as singers. For me, the lack of people who could really sing (Lee and Clint) was a minus as they grunted out the lyrics and tried to find the notes. The songs themselves were not memorable. The plot dealt with a novel idea for a musical - Jean "loved" both Lee and Clint, sharing time with them (that's probably why my mom nixed my seeing the movie in 1969). Josh Logan directed and gave it his "South Pacific" MOVIE effort - that movie being a not big success when it came out, unlike his stage version. Paint's scenes seemed cobbled together; Lee seemed truly drunk; Clint seemed to be wondering how to get back to Italy and do another spaghetti Western and not have to sing "I Talk to the Trees"; Jean seemed to be hoping to have the movie end (she later committed suicide); to this day I agree with my mom on "Mariah"; and I multiplexed my watching time by playing with the cats, fixing a snack, eating a snack, etc. Unfortunately, for me the movie doesn't fall into the categories of guilty pleasure, so bad it's good, interesting time piece, good songs in a bad movie, great dancing, worth watching one more time to see if I missed something. It's just bad. Absolutely no fun - not even laughable. But taste is very individualistic and other people may love this movie for some reason. Here are two other musical movies that I would put in the trash bin - Phantom of the Opera and Les Miserables. Gerard Butler was a good looking guy and I thought he might have a good career. But why would anyone cast someone who was a very mediocre singer in a movie that had a stage star of phenomenal talent (Michael Crawford)? And how did Michael go from a goofy young man who was in some not great musicals to the Phantom - an ugly, crude monster whose voice rang the rafters while he conveyed love and sexiness (yes!) for his muse and changed into a man who showed love by releasing the woman he loved to someone else? It was the best performance and the best presentation I have ever seen in my 67 years. Les Miz, the movie that made me miserable and seemed to go on for DAYS, WEEKS, MONTHS. How does anyone change a handsome man like Hugh into a guy who looks like Woody Allen? And why so many closeups? Why so much nasal discharge? Once again, others may love these films. That gives them more to watch on Saturday nights. Liz, if you are still reading this, I salute you. My disability gives me too much time these days. May you have a wonderful life enjoying music and movies!

@@marthawelch4289 Oh, but I respectfully and strongly disagree on both points ! I think Paint Your Wagon was a gloriously sarcastic and fun movie that went against the grain of Hollywood Western movies and against the typical musical that had, hopefully, great singers for the leads. Having Lee Marvin and Clint Eastwood do their own singing and not trying to really sing good, made it even that much more fun. I actually thought that Lee Marvin did great with his song " I Was Born Under a Wand'ring Star". One does not expect a rough & tumble gold miner to be a trained singer, and Marvin did not disappoint. Actually, he was on key well enough for most of the song, just a rough & scratchy on key. I felt that this crusty and unpolished miner really let his unsuccessful life come through in the song. And with Lee and Clint married to the same woman...OH MY...!! Hollywood really rocked the mainstream boat with Paint Your Wagon...bravo for making this crazy funny movie.

Disney used to be a company that was huge but small enough that they cultivated their own talent. They had THEIR DISNEY STARS that were known for being Disney stars. Disney would invest in them from a young age and stick with them well into their adult career. Now they are just another huge conglomerate swallowing up IP after IP, studio after studio and have become a soulless corporate machine where she was just another dime a dozen in their eyes. To such a corporation EVERYTHING is disposable as long as they make their bottom line FATTER!

Yes but also, the same could be said of all singers signed by major record labels. It's a requirement that all vocals are auto tuned. It's ridiculous

Even when they are very capable singers! I don't know if they've managed to make the singers themselves believe that their performances are being improved by this. I guess it's possible. With time some people start to think that this is the way singing "should" sound. Or maybe people like the "effect"? And look, I understand there are times when you want to fix a bum note here and there. They used to do this even way before Autotune ever existed, just by adjusting the pitch manually. But running all the vocal performances through a pitch correcting software is frankly a joke.

That may be wishful thinking. I don't think there is any evidence that Emma can sing worth a flip and god knows some people are incapable of singing. You have only to watch some of those reality singing competitions to hear some singers that are clueless about pitch. If Emma happens to be one of those you could give her lesson until the cows come home and she would still not be able to pull it off. You also have to consider that for all we know Emma thinks she can sing and wouldn't even take lessons if you asked her to, never assume an actor is willing to accept criticism.

It would cost a lot more time and money to have her coached rather than just having a guy in a studio "fix" everything.

Marni Nixon also 'ghost sang' for Natalie Wood in "West Side Story". Both movies won Oscars for Best Picture.

@@lynndow3185 Hi Lynn... Marni Nixon could change her voice to sound close to the actress she was singing for.

@@drewpall2598 I didn't know that, but I just noticed it after I listened to a song from each of those films! Amazing! She sounded so similar to Audrey Hepburn especially.

Also Jimmy Bryant sang the parts for Richard Beymer in West Side Story .

Julie Andrews hadn't been in the movies prior to 1964. In that same year that My Fair Lady came out, she debuted in her very first movie role of Mary Poppins. Imagine what Mary Poppins would have been like without Julie Andrews alongside the great Dick Van Dyke?! The following year, 1965, she starred in her most beloved role of Maria Von Trapp in the Sound of Music. She's a legend!

Thanks!

I think his singing was pretty decent

His singing was actually pretty good. It fit the roll very well. Was he fit to stand with Pavarotti? No. But it was perfect for the style of remake. He also sang in some other movies.

They don’t necessarily have to be trained. They just have to be good singers, with a vocal range that encompasses the range of the songs they’re going to be asked to sing. There are plenty of great, professional, highly skilled singers with no formal training. Furthermore, there are roles and styles that are actually quite ill-suited to the typical sound of a highly trained musical theatre voice. The problem is casting non-singers, which happens because the ability to sing has fallen so low on the list of priorities when casting these roles (in part, because the people making the casting decisions falsely believe that any vocal shortcomings can be fixed in post)

Cool!

I think they may believe that pitch correction makes it no longer necessary to have a trained singer to do singing - the “separate voice only for the songs” thing is not uncommon historically.

@@JasperJanssen Right. The autotune plugin, is cheaper than an another employee.

The thing is...Broadway and West End performers are also phenomenal actors. There is no excuse for not casting someone qualified. Simply hire someone who does musical theatre and you will have both good vocals and good acting. Then your film will actually be good!

@@carr0760 and your film will also be a flop, because those actors are not even close to the kind of draw that Watson is. Star Power is still a thing.

@@JasperJanssen I still believe that people would choose to see someone who is good over someone who is famous. We just have to give them the benefit of the doubt and stop dumbing things down. Plus, you'll make up sales from all of us who actually expect the music in a musical to be good, and thus don't watch when they go for fame over ability.

And Watson

@@piplee1439 Amen.

There's an emotional disconnect that is only made worse by the manipulation.

There was an attempt

There is some other video around that shows that part of the problem is that it is the other way round: They didn't want to actors "sing" playback, they made the audio recording while acting and walking around. And that made it a lot harder and because they aren't trained musical actors, they had to reprocess the voices so much.

Musical theater performer: “The song should be in character and continue telling the story.” Disney exec: “The notes are there.”

👍

GroovingPict...Yes, you are correct about a lot of dubbing being done with the songs years ago, but...it was still a natural voice...and this is a fundamental difference between dubbing back then and today's awful auto-tune crap.

Given his age I wouldn’t be at all surprised.

@@kata7628 And that’s another thing - he’s 80 apparently but looks maybe in his 40s max. He looks incredible for his age. Even from when he was young, his pitch was a little off, but his voice has character, is very distinctive, and that’s what always carried it to some extent. But still, if he has allowed his vocal to be pitch-corrected, I’ll be surprised - unless his tuning really has deteriorated

Ringo's "Rock Around the Clock" not corrected IMO. I just listened and heard some flat notes, although my ears aren't the most sensitive. He always sang like that.