Sign In

Mike O

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
20-Jun-2006
Last activity
21-Jan-2018
Posts
2216

Post History

Post
#1160586
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

DominicCobb said:

TV’s Frink said:

Han Solo IRL said:

AOTC and ROTS look totally fine to me in terms of picture quality; I mean it’s not like they look like 28 Days Later or something.

28 Days Later looks that way on purpose (I assume, I don’t know anything about picture quality).

I mean, if you’re saying they chose to shoot it on a shit camera, sure.

They chose to shoot on cheap DV. Whether that was a good decision or not, the aesthetic choice was pretty deliberate. I assumed it was much like the idea of shooting on grainy 16mm to give a specifically gritty look.

Post
#1160354
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

Collipso said:

Humby said:

Michael Ward said:

Collipso said:

You can’t deny he was technologically innovative though, since most movies today are shot in digital cameras and Lucas was the one that started the trend.

I don’t find it innovative. The technology already existed and was being used on smaller films. All he did was use it badly.

Innovation doesn’t always age well, but what GL and Lucasfilm (along with Sony, Panavision, and a host of others) did for digital cinema literally revolutionized the industry. You don’t have to enjoy the prequels, I certainly don’t love them, but whether or not they were innovative isn’t up for debate. It’s a fact.

Michael Ward said:

Frank your Majesty said:

Just like digital photo cameras, digital film cameras are much more convenient. It’s easy to assume that they would have been adapted eventually, if they perform just as well as analog cameras. I don’t deny that Lucas probably recognized the potential and wanted to advance the technology. However, he definitely used it too early. He was more concerned with being comfortable while making the movie than with the final product. The reason more and more directors started to film digitally after Lucas was simply the advancement of the technology itself, not because they liked the look of Episode 2.

I hadn’t thought about Lucas’s comfort. I’ve always felt he was just trying too hard to appear innovative.

Shooting digital back in those early days was hardly easier and comfortable. If anything, it was a bigger pain in the a$$ than shooting on film. The problem is that shooting on film wasn’t practical for the sheer amount of digital post-work needed for episode II.

Man, I’ve edited this post way too many times, but I have one more thing to add…

One of the biggest things that made the prequels so innovative, wasn’t just the use of digital cameras or the amount of CGI or the use of Non-linear editing, etc. It was the COMBINATION of all of these things. Yes, eventually we would have gotten to where we are now. But the sheer amount of advancement in all of these technologies for one film (specifically Ep.2) brought about a good 15 years of advancement in a matter of 3-6 years.

Yes, and I don’t think any filmmaker that we’ve had in the past 40 years would have the courage to go as experimental as Lucas did in his work. Some may even argue he’s the hugest contributor to the industry for the past 50 years, by creating Jar Jar and CGI Yoda and Coruscant and shooting on digital camera in the latter two prequels. All of these things were undoubtedly milestones. Just because they would eventually happen doesn’t take the merit away from Lucas.

That’s not to say that the prequels weren’t dog crap though, because they certainly were. RotS objectively less than the others but still.

Whatever else can be said of Lucas and some of his weaknesses as a storyteller, he’s almost always been a technical innovator.

Post
#1159507
Topic
No sh*zn*t, Sherlock!
Time

dahmage said:

I agree with your reviews of the three series.

As a child, my family often watched this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherlock_Holmes_(1984_TV_series) and i consider that my benchmark for what Sherlock should be.

It unfortunately switched to different creative personnel in the later seasons and really suffered for it by making way too many changes to source material in the adaptations, but God, those early years really are wonderful. For a lot of people, that’s very understandably the definite take on Holmes. Brett is magnificent, and Hardwicke and Burke were both a great Watson.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1158977
Topic
Which franchise is bigger and more iconic Star Wars or Harry Potter
Time

Shopping Maul said:

Mike O said:

chyron8472 said:

Mike O said:

What is the “Kurtz version?

Gary Kurtz, co-producer of Star Wars and TESB, wanted ROTJ to end on a bittersweet, poignant tone. Were Lucas not to have intervened and changed the story to be more fun and have a happy ending, among other things Han Solo would have died a sacrificial death for his friends (and completed his character arc from a selfish scoundrel to a loyal hero), there would have been no second Death Star, and also no Ewok Celebration (or “teddy bear picnic” as Harrison Ford put it).

No kidding? I’m fascinated. Did Lucas kick Kurtz off the project because of creative differences or something? I read just recently that McQuarrie had some clashes with him and was running out of ideas by ROTJ. Did they originally want to bring Kershner back to direct?

Kurtz has done a few interviews (they’re all over the internet) talking about his dislike for the direction George was taking with ROTJ. There was also supposedly a question of budget - Kurtz allowed Kershner some extra time on TESB which led to the shoot going over budget. Kurtz ended up directing some scenes himself to save time. I’m not sure how significant the budgetary factor was in Lucas’ and Kurtz’ parting of ways.

Damn, fascinating. I didn’t know any of this! So in some parallel universe, there’s a version of ROTJ that actually pays off everything in ESB, I like the weak version we got? I’d be willing to bet it was a combination of going over budget with Lucas money and Lucas probably wanting more creative control over things after ESB. I really had no idea about any of this, it’s really interesting to me. I’m a disgrace to these forums, I know 😉.

Post
#1158452
Topic
Which franchise is bigger and more iconic Star Wars or Harry Potter
Time

chyron8472 said:

Mike O said:

What is the “Kurtz version?

Gary Kurtz, co-producer of Star Wars and TESB, wanted ROTJ to end on a bittersweet, poignant tone. Were Lucas not to have intervened and changed the story to be more fun and have a happy ending, among other things Han Solo would have died a sacrificial death for his friends (and completed his character arc from a selfish scoundrel to a loyal hero), there would have been no second Death Star, and also no Ewok Celebration (or “teddy bear picnic” as Harrison Ford put it).

No kidding? I’m fascinated. Did Lucas kick Kurtz off the project because of creative differences or something? I read just recently that McQuarrie had some clashes with him and was running out of ideas by ROTJ. Did they originally want to bring Kershner back to direct?

This post has been edited.

Post
#1158017
Topic
Last movie seen
Time

dahmage said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Ender’s Game

meh. The book was better.

I so wanted this film to be awesome. It still has value, but man, they cut too much of the story IMO. Book is way better. Should have been a two part movie.

I thought it moved fairly smoothly. Card even says in the afterword that if there was ever a film, that he’d have removed most of the Locke and Demosthenes storyline.

Post
#1157628
Topic
THX on 35mm Tech IB preservation - HELP NEEDED
Time

Mavimao said:

Glad you enjoyed it Harmy!

So a couple years ago, I watched all the versions of THX side to side so I have a pretty good idea at what the differences are and where to find them. Also, as the creator of the Grindhouse version, I can safely say that while it wouldn’t be impossible to despecialize the film using the Bluray, anyone attempting this is going to run into the following issues:

  1. The computer screens: all of the warning signs are in Italian on the print and therefore the only other sources we have are faded and cropped 16mm prints and the LD. These were all changed for the BD.

  2. The scene with THX and SRT in the room with the fetuses: this occurs at a reel change and there is a good chunk of footage missing on the print at this point in time. To make matters worse, the bottles were ‘enhanced’ on the BD, so this would require some kind of rotoscoping using the LD or the 16mm prints.

  3. The sunset ending: It’s a shame that the end titles are in Italian on the print because the BD sunset has some weird halo-ing artifacts around THX (noise reduction artifacts?). Maybe this can be fixed…?

TL;DR: It’s a shame we don’t have any more sources to work from like we do for Star Wars.

Perhaps another print will show up one day?

Post
#1155940
Topic
If you need to B*tch about something... this is the place
Time

Someone hit my car while it was in park in a parking space in a parking lot because of turning the wrong way. I’ve been on the phone with this person a couple of times, and filed a claim with my insurance company. Unfortunately, she needs to file a claim with her’s, and she hasn’t yet. I really don’t want to be difficult or stay on her, but I really need her to do this. My car needs some (thankfully minor) body work as a result, and her insurance company should be paying it.

Post
#1155674
Topic
THX on 35mm Tech IB preservation - HELP NEEDED
Time

SilverWook said:

It’s George Lucas’ first movie, of course there’s a market. Put From the creator of Star Wars on the cover and it will sell. They release far more obscure stuff through the archive because they don’t print more than needed.

How many people really want to watch this uncut without a guy and two robots riffing on it? 😉

It’s the typical non answer probably because George has the clout to keep the original buried. If TCM can’t show it, then Warner Bros. can’t release it either.

Which is why I thought that even the alleged presence of the 1971 cut on AIV and Vudu seemed so weird to me; why even pretend it still exists? Like I said, any interested parties here could hit them up on Twitter to ask. Couldn’t hurt.

Speaking of weird, Silverwook, my iPhone shows you having a different avatar than my PC. Strange.

Yeah, it’s probably down to Lucas as usual 😦. I wish there was some way to squeeze like there was with Star Wars, but I just think that the interest level is too low.

The Grindhouse Edition really does look as terrible as advertised 😉.

SilverWook said:

Harmy said:

So, I finally watched this movie yesterday, thanks to the grindhouse version and it was very interesting - I’m definitely still interested in doing a Despecialized version - the print is in fairly good condition but it would be great, if someone with a good knowledge of this movie could take poita’s scan and identify all the shots that would be needed to replace altered one’s, so that those can be cleaned first.

The changes are far more extensive than anything done to the Special Editions. I don’t envy you the work you’d have to put in on this one.

I’d buy that for a dollar 😉.

Post
#1155322
Topic
THX on 35mm Tech IB preservation - HELP NEEDED
Time

Harmy said:

So, I finally watched this movie yesterday, thanks to the grindhouse version and it was very interesting - I’m definitely still interested in doing a Despecialized version - the print is in fairly good condition but it would be great, if someone with a good knowledge of this movie could take poita’s scan and identify all the shots that would be needed to replace altered one’s, so that those can be cleaned first.

It arguably needs it as much as Star Wars. Anyone have the old LD to compare against the 35mm print?

I hit up Warner Archive on Twitter. They didn’t comment on the issue of the so-called theatrical cuts on Vudu and AIV, but said they have “no plans to release the original on disc at this time.” Maybe if more people blew up their Twitter with requests, they’d know there’s a market? I doubt it, but hey.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1155090
Topic
THX on 35mm Tech IB preservation - HELP NEEDED
Time

According to Osbourne on my VHS tape’s intro, it was the “TCM debut.” He must’ve meant of the director’s cut. I’ve notified Amazon and Vudu that what they list as the theatrical version isn’t, and today I let WB know too. I don’t for one minute expect any answer, but hey. A DVD-R (or preferably Blu-ray MOD) release would be ideal, but I’d bet that pigs will fly before that happens. I hit up WB Archive on Twitter too, for the hell of it.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1155024
Topic
THX on 35mm Tech IB preservation - HELP NEEDED
Time

The Vudu version of the “theatrical cut” was the Special Edition too. I knew I shouldn’t have gotten so excited. Ah, well. Damn shame about the TCM airings always being the director’s cut, they ought to be fucking ashamed. That goes against their whole mission statement. With the Disney buyout and all the public interest, there is a possibility of Star Wars eventually having its theatrical cut restored in HD, the chances for THX 1138 are essentially non-existent, especially given the current state of the physical media market.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1154715
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

They stuff they padded it out with from the appendices was fine. The stuff they just added in to pad out the time? That was much more problematic. No question, it could’ve easily been one movie that was 3-4 hours. Easily.

Post
#1154699
Topic
4K restoration on Star Wars
Time

Wazzles said:

Mike O said:

J0E said:

Mike O said:

Possessed said:

Personally my friends and I didn’t like the first Hobbit movie, so I’m honestly amazed the sequels got made.

I am like the lone apologist for those films.

I picked up the Extended Cut DVD’s the other day from Walmart and I just got through the first one last night and thoroughly enjoyed it. I haven’t gotten through the entire trilogy yet, but if the next two movies are as good as the first, I’ll put them on par with the LOTR Trilogy.

They aren’t as good as LOTr, I freely admit that. They have lots of problems, and there are huge chunks of them that you could cut out. But the accusation that they’re as bad as the Star Wars prequels is frankly just insane. The casting alone puts them head and shoulders above.

They have some of the same issues, being prequels and all, but their major faults are being terrible adaptations of the book.

I think part of them are terrific adaptations of the book; the first hour or so of the first movie is almost word-for-word. The stuff they added in that’s actually in Tolkien is pretty good; the Dol Goldur stuff, etc. The material they just added to pad things out like the inter-species romance, not so much.

Post
#1154688
Topic
THX on 35mm Tech IB preservation - HELP NEEDED
Time

I checked with Amazon Instant Video, sadly, in spite of what they list, the so-called 1971 version is in fact the 2004 cut. I knew it was too good to be true 😦.

Apparently I just will never see it.

towne32 said:

SilverWook said:

Isn’t the work in progress Grindhouse version still floating around?

Yes, it’s on myspleen. 720p and has Laserdisc frames replacing the missing ones.

Yeah, but with no more invites, you can’t get onto that 😉.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1154323
Topic
Last movie seen
Time

ray_afraid said:

suspiciouscoffee said:

Would The Last Starfighter count as a Star Wars knockoff?

Nah.
Also, Message From Space is awesome.

Is that the one with the starfish monsters?

Mud- Matthew McConaughey vehicle continues his career resurrection. Hugely atmospheric slice of Southern Gothic with good performances, but a little slow-moving.

Magic Mike- Matthew McConaughey and Channing Tatum, both in roles tailor-made for them. Soderberg blends his usual intelligent social commentary with a thoroughly familiar, almost cliched storyline to surprising effect. Tatum proves very amicable, and McConaughey has a great time as the sleazebag strip club owner who sells sex and fantasy with a colossal ego. Not exactly subject matter in which I had a vested interest, but interesting.

Killer Joe- Another Matthew McConaughey vehicle, this one from fallen 70s aeuter William Friedkin. At age 78, Friedkin remains ever the provocateur, and the movie pushes the envelope and is anarchic and unruly in the best ways. Sadly, it feels more like a freak show-I watch the black comedy car accident with perverse interest, but the black humor in the more vulgar moments feels very ill-judged, and the characters are kind of repugnant. It’s the kind of thing you with with interest but not necessarily involvement, at least it was for me. Great performances though, McConaughey’s charisma is twisted into something darker and more malevolent. Shot digitally, Caleb Deschanel is a superb DOP, and the film is stunning looking, but doesn’t quite have the atmosphere of Mud, even if it’s more lurid. Maybe the baking heat is just an easier thing to convey on grainy celluloid than on crisp digital. I still think the grainy 16mm of Hooper’s original The Texas Chain Saw Massacre is the closest I’ve ever come to smelling a movie. Speaking of which…

The Devil’s Rejects- Rob Zombie’s sadistic throwback to the 70s horror movies he loves has it down stylistically. None of the trendy and shiny cinematography, annoying digital FX, and rapid-fire editing of newer remakes, it’s shot on grainy Super 16 with a 70s southern rock soundtrack. The whole movie is cast with exploitation icons and feels wonderfully ragged and dirty. Sadly, Zombie doesn’t appear to have absorbed any of the underlying social context of the movies he loves, so his homage feels empty, just a parade of stylized sadism with no center. You could argue there’s a subtext of becoming monstrous fighting monsters, but it’s awful thin. The cast are all having a sleazy great time though, a terrifying Sid Haig, a gleefully profane Bill Mosley, and a hilariously redneck William Forsythe as an Elvis-loving sheriff. “I’m sure your knowledge of bullshit is limitless!”

This post has been edited.

To the top