Sign In

canofhumdingers

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
7-May-2005
Last activity
17-Feb-2018
Posts
849

Post History

Post
#1171289
Topic
Han - Solo Movie ** Spoilers **
Time

Hmm, if the play features of the toy is any indication, it appears as though my annoyance at the new pointy nose of the Falcon may be alleviated…

http://ew.com/movies/solo-a-star-wars-story-hasbro-toys/kessel-run-millennium-falcon

Also, that’s possibly a cool nod to an unproduced vintage Kenner idea…

Also also, I only recently picked up on how the flat-mounted radar dish is a nod to some of McQuarrie’s concept paintings…

Post
#1171286
Topic
The Last Jedi: Official Review and Opinions Thread ** SPOILERS **
Time

But Luke did totally own Kylo Ren in a duel before dying…

And it was a most ingenious and satisfying victory for Luke. I don’t love everything about the movie, but I did love how this was handled.

I get that it may not have been the traditional sword fight you were looking for, but consider this. I once had a Kendo sensei teach me that you do not win a swordfight with the cut or strike. You beat your opponent in mind and spirit before you even begin the stroke. The striking of a winning blow is merely the confirmation of your victory.*

In this sense, I think Luke’s victory over kylo is actually the most poignant and intense victory he could have achieved and I found that immensely satisfying.

*it’s worth noting that I continued training regularly for many years after this lesson and found, through personal experience, it is absolutely true.

Post
#1171281
Topic
Your latest star wars buys?
Time

Ah, very cool. I had some sort of starter box set of that game from when it first came out. I don’t recall if I ever actually played it though. No one in my family would’ve been nerdy enough to sit down and learn an rpg style card game with me…

Post
#1170972
Topic
The Random <em>Star Wars</em> Pics &amp; GIFs Thread
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

Eh, they looked pretty plasticy and, well, not dangerous to me. I was also not a huge fan of the shiny chrome pistols in TPM for the same reason. Too toylike, not very weaponlike.

I’m guessing you’re not much of a gun person in real life? Plastic (and composite) is the name of the game in military/police weapons. Just imagine all those green bits (that match his green uniform) were white, to match white armor…

Also…

And chrome (or a similar look) has been around a VERY long time…

Post
#1170510
Topic
Little Men, Little Wars - Share Your Star Wars Collection
Time

I’m building a Bandai 1/12 Stormtrooper. It’s a spectacular kit. I’ve still got some very small weathering to do (im going for the “polished from a distance; but hand-made, roughed up, chipped, and scuffed upon close inspection” look from ANH), but otherwise I finished the helmet tonight. Very happy with how he’s turned out.

In front of a couple full size helmets (the model helmet is maybe an inch tall. Maybe.)

With the guys he’ll accompany on the shelf once the rest of his body is done.

Post
#1169956
Topic
General Star Wars Random Thoughts Thread
Time

The crumpled face is the standard rank and file snowtrooper. The smooth face with nostrils is the snowtrooper commander. There are many other differences between the costumes too.

Post
#1169055
Topic
Han - Solo Movie ** Spoilers **
Time

You know, that’s a good point with the personally owned freight trucks… I’m looking at the interior from the point of view of large transportation companies with fleets of (nearly) identical utilitarian vehicles. The Falcon is a privately owned and operated cargo vessel. Alright, fine. I’ll concede. The interior is fine and does indeed make sense.

But I still don’t like what they did to the mandibles, gosh darn it!! 😛

Post
#1169036
Topic
Han - Solo Movie ** Spoilers **
Time

SilverWook said:

Never mind that the first ship interior we ever saw in Star Wars was pretty antiseptic looking. 😉
![](https://i.stack.imgur.com/CeVh0.jpg

We’re seeing a factory fresh freighter here. By the OT the Falcon is that car with a faded dusty interior, with big cracks in the dashboard and holes where stereo speakers used to be.

Oh, no doubt. It’s just seeing the Falcon looking THAT nice somehow feels a little off… As you said, it’s a freighter, not a luxury vessel. I work in transportation and see shipping vehicles (trucks, planes, loading equipment, etc.) regularly. Even brand new cargo vehicles have a very utilitarian aesthetic. That ship looks downright posh.

Again, I don’t HATE it and I’m willing to accept it. But it’s definately not how I would’ve done it and it feels a bit fake which seems slightly disingenuous when the OT (especially Star Wars itself) looked and felt so REAL.

Post
#1169001
Topic
Han - Solo Movie ** Spoilers **
Time

Anchorhead said:

Apologies if this is somewhere in the previous pages; It looks like we’ll be seeing the Falcon before Han made a lot of special modifications himself.

The image has been out for a bit (and you can see the ship clearly in the trailer), but I don’t think we’ve discussed it much.

I don’t mind the Falcon being new and looking a bit different than what we’re used to, but I’m not crazy about the design choices we’ve seen so far. I agree that the interior looks a bit TOO antiseptic but I can live with it.

What really bugs me is the enclosed front mandibles. The Falcon is supposed to be a freighter, but the shape/design really doesn’t make any sense for loading cargo… and I always remember the front appendages being referred to as “docking mandibles” back in the 90’s. Which made sense to me. I always envisioned it doing exactly what the concept art below (from TFA I believe?) shows. THAT’s how it hauls cargo (in my mind). So closing that gap up is the one redesign that I’m really not a fan of at all. I’ll reserve final judgement until I actually see the film, but right now I really don’t like this particular design choice.

As for the film itself, I’m not yet convinced this actor will be able to pull off the character of Han for me, but I’ll give him a chance. Everything else in the trailer looks pretty awesome.

Post
#1168610
Topic
New Star Wars films to be produced and written by David Benioff and D.B. Weiss.
Time

DominicCobb said:

canofhumdingers said:

And now this… hope they’re good, but once again I feel NO anticipation. It’s weird to feel this way about new Star Wars movies…

Genuine question, do you in general get excited about new movies? I myself have felt my anticipation levels for major franchise movies (and maybe just new movies in general) drop significantly as I’ve gotten older. I just wonder if I’m the only one.

Yes I do still get excited for movies (and many other things in life). I may be in my mid thirties, but I never really grew up in spirit. That’s not to say I’m a mindless obnoxious person on the internet going “ZOMG EVERY NEW THING IS THE BESTEST THING IVE EVER SEEN!!!” I have a brain with logic and critical thinking and reasonable judgement.

I’m sure that my excitement is oftimes more muted, level headed, or cautiously optimistic as an adult than it might’ve been as a kid, but it’s still there. And there are some things that I like so much that I still get downright giddy about as they come near. Kong: Skull Island and Justice League were two recent films that I was very excited to see. Kong was perfect, I love that movie. Justice League wasn’t perfect, but I liked it a lot more than most seemed to have.

Heck, I was genuinely excited for TLJ. I thought TFA set up a very cool premise with good characters and was eager to see where it went. While I didn’t hate TLJ, I’m far from loving it and initially felt a bit disaapointed. But disappointments like that don’t squash my enthusiasm for future films that I’m excited to see.

But I don’t get excited about everything that comes my way. I feel no excitement for these new unnamed Star Wars films. Maybe as more info comes out or a trailer drops, that will change.

In the end, I’m happy I can still feel the type of genuine excitement I felt as a kid sometimes. The world is too hard and life is too short to get jaded about everything (not accusing anyone here, just thinking outloud). It’s fun to still get excited about a movie that looks cool or sounds like it’s right up my alley (whether other people like it or not, like Justice League).

Post
#1168475
Topic
New Star Wars films to be produced and written by David Benioff and D.B. Weiss.
Time

It’s impossible to kill my love for the OT, R1, and some of the classic EU that was a huge part of my childhood and adolescence.

But I’m starting to feel the fatigue creeping in with al the new stuff. I liked but didn’t love TLJ. Heck, I only saw it twice and don’t have the desire to see it again in the theater (something Star Wars hasn’t done to me since AOTC, which I’ve hated from my first viewing!)

I liked that (like R1) the imagery in the new Solo trailer reminded me of some of the best 70’s-90’s EU, but otherwise I felt little actual excitement.

I’m totally indifferent about RJ’s announced trilogy.

And now this… hope they’re good, but once again I feel NO anticipation. It’s weird to feel this way about new Star Wars movies…

This post has been edited.

Post
#1167077
Topic
The Last Jedi: Official Review and Opinions Thread ** SPOILERS **
Time

DominicCobb said:

canofhumdingers said:

yotsuya said:

NeverarGreat said:

joefavs said:

DominicCobb said:

On the one hand, maybe it drains remote suns just like how it destroys remote planets. But in that case, why does it drain its own sun? On the other hand, maybe it does move around to new suns, but in that case why doesn’t it completely drain the first sun it orbits like it does the second (Hux’s speech is in daylight)? To me it doesn’t matter much either way.

I honestly never thought it was two different stars. I just figured the star that they drained to destroy the Hosnian system was large enough that they were able to get two charges out of it.

But Finn claims that the weapon draws power from the sun until it disappears, implying that once the draining starts, it will not stop until the star is destroyed. Poe repeats this during their attack.

Stop and think for a moment. Using up two stars does not mean it had to move. It is possible that they found the ideal system with multiple stars to use with this weapons. They probably destroyed the smallest star first and from a larger one they might get several charges out of it. There is a big difference between Sol and Sirius. A star that might give one charge could be the companion of a star that can give sixty. And I never got the impression that the first star was destroyed as Starkiller base never went dark which it would if the sun was sucked dry. Sometimes science can be the friend of wild SF storytelling.

You keep mentioning how the sky never went dark, but… I thought we only saw it charge once? It was charged at some point off screen (same system or a different one? The film doesn’t answer this question and it’s really irrelevant. It could’ve been charged before the movie even started for all we know). It expends this charge when it fires on the Hosnian system. Then it begins draining the star that it currently orbits in order to fire on the resistance.

So, of course the sky never went dark. We only actually SAW it charging once, after it had fired.

Are you suggesting that it only somewhat drains the sun, and after a bit the sun builds back its energy so that it’s not dark anymore?

What? No. I have no idea what’s going on with this discussion anymore.

My point was this:

SKB charges up off screen by sucking up some other star. This probably happened before we ever saw SKB and it had already moved to another star while holding on to its charge. It fires on the Hosnian system. It then begins draining the star it’s currently orbiting in order to fire on the resistance. We only see the sky go dark during the final battle because that is the only charging cycle we actually see on screen.

I don’t remember if there’s any dialogue or something else in the film that might contradict this scenario. But this certainly seems like the most likely sequence of events to me.

Post
#1166686
Topic
The Last Jedi: Official Review and Opinions Thread ** SPOILERS **
Time

yotsuya said:

NeverarGreat said:

joefavs said:

DominicCobb said:

On the one hand, maybe it drains remote suns just like how it destroys remote planets. But in that case, why does it drain its own sun? On the other hand, maybe it does move around to new suns, but in that case why doesn’t it completely drain the first sun it orbits like it does the second (Hux’s speech is in daylight)? To me it doesn’t matter much either way.

I honestly never thought it was two different stars. I just figured the star that they drained to destroy the Hosnian system was large enough that they were able to get two charges out of it.

But Finn claims that the weapon draws power from the sun until it disappears, implying that once the draining starts, it will not stop until the star is destroyed. Poe repeats this during their attack.

Stop and think for a moment. Using up two stars does not mean it had to move. It is possible that they found the ideal system with multiple stars to use with this weapons. They probably destroyed the smallest star first and from a larger one they might get several charges out of it. There is a big difference between Sol and Sirius. A star that might give one charge could be the companion of a star that can give sixty. And I never got the impression that the first star was destroyed as Starkiller base never went dark which it would if the sun was sucked dry. Sometimes science can be the friend of wild SF storytelling.

You keep mentioning how the sky never went dark, but… I thought we only saw it charge once? It was charged at some point off screen (same system or a different one? The film doesn’t answer this question and it’s really irrelevant. It could’ve been charged before the movie even started for all we know). It expends this charge when it fires on the Hosnian system. Then it begins draining the star that it currently orbits in order to fire on the resistance.

So, of course the sky never went dark. We only actually SAW it charging once, after it had fired.

Post
#1166461
Topic
Pictures of screenings of TFA, R1 and TLJ in 35mm / 70mm / Dolby Cinema?
Time

Boushh said:

I loved reading that shootout. Please tell me you have similar ones about 2K digital vs pristine 35mm print in optimal conditions? hehe

Well, there’s this technical article where they conducted experiments to measure the actual resolving power of 35mm film when it’s projected in a movie theater.

We all know that, when scanned, 35mm easily resolves 2K and usually can make use of 4K scanning (I’ll leave the debate open for 8K, though there’s certainly evidence that 8K scanning can be useful when using high quality 35mm film). But how much of that resolution actually makes it to the screen when thrown across the room by the projector?

According to this experiment, not a lot. They found that in a movie theater, you’re really only getting the equivalent of 685 to 875 lines of resolution up on the screen.

Now, I personally think that seems low. I’ve seen enough 35mm projections (even in this age of digital) to say that I’ve seen film projection that rivals any standard 2 or 4K movie theater. And with film you don’t have the issue of being able to see the pixels or lines of resolution (which I can regularly see clearly in standard 2K theaters… drives me nuts!)

But I’m not an expert or industry professional like the people who conducted these tests, so who knows?

http://www.motionfx.gr/files/35mm_resolution_english.pdf

Post
#1166340
Topic
Pictures of screenings of TFA, R1 and TLJ in 35mm / 70mm / Dolby Cinema?
Time

SilverWook said:

canofhumdingers said:

In 2011 they held a direct, live, side-by-side comparison of 15/70 IMAX film vs 4K DLP at Moody Gardens in Galveston, TX. The general consensus among the industry professionals was that the 4K image was superior. I can only imagine that Imax’s laser system is superior to that Barco DLP projector. So I don’t doubt that by standardized metrics the Laser system is technically superior to the film system.

http://www.lfexaminer.com/20110518shootout-in-galveston-1570-vs-digital.htm

But it doesn’t change the fact that imax film is flipping amazing an can resolve FAR more detail than even the best digital mediums. Whether that detail makes it to the projected image is more debatable I guess. And resolution is far from the end-all be-all of image quality. Brightness, contrast, and color reproduction are all just as important as resolution.

But does it look like film? Superior isn’t always better. And everyone involved has every reason to stack the deck in favor of digital.

I don’t know about that shootout, but I can say that I’d be really hard pressed to say the two IMAX Laser screenings I’ve seen were in any way inferior to the numerous 15/70 screenings I’ve been to. The amateur film lover/historian/preservationist in me went into Dunkirk secretly wanting to walk out and declare film was still king, but I just couldn’t. That dual 4K projection system they’ve cooked up really impressed me. Personally, I do still prefer film and would jump at any reasonable chance to see another 15/70 screening. But realistically I’m perfectly happy to walk into a full size Imax laser screening when I want the premium theatrical experience.

Post
#1166286
Topic
Pictures of screenings of TFA, R1 and TLJ in 35mm / 70mm / Dolby Cinema?
Time

In 2011 they held a direct, live, side-by-side comparison of 15/70 IMAX film vs 4K DLP at Moody Gardens in Galveston, TX. The general consensus among the industry professionals was that the 4K image was superior. I can only imagine that Imax’s laser system is superior to that Barco DLP projector. So I don’t doubt that by standardized metrics the Laser system is technically superior to the film system.

http://www.lfexaminer.com/20110518shootout-in-galveston-1570-vs-digital.htm

But it doesn’t change the fact that imax film is flipping amazing an can resolve FAR more detail than even the best digital mediums. Whether that detail makes it to the projected image is more debatable I guess. And resolution is far from the end-all be-all of image quality. Brightness, contrast, and color reproduction are all just as important as resolution.

Post
#1166218
Topic
Pictures of screenings of TFA, R1 and TLJ in 35mm / 70mm / Dolby Cinema?
Time

IMAX laser can be the full 1.43:1 ratio or it can be it can be cropped vertically to 1.9:1. You just have to ask the specific theater to find out.

I saw TFA in full 70mm IMAX in Indianapolis and it was glorious.

I saw Rogue One in standard digital IMAX 3-D, but on a full size IMAX screen (not a post-converted “LieMAX” Screen) in Phoenix. I was actually surprised at how good it looked. Far and away the best 3-D presentation I’ve ever seen. It was a surprisingly enjoyable and memorable experience. Though I’ll admit I was glad I had already seen the film twice in 2-D previously, so I was able to really focus on enjoying the 3-D part of the viewing experience.

I saw Dunkirk in Austin, TX on a full size 1.43:1 IMAX Laser (actually the biggest screen in TX) as my first experience seeing IMAX Laser. I was rather surprised that, as far as I could tell, it was every bit as good as 70mm IMAX film. Just beautiful.

And that experience led to me seeing TLJ at that same IMAX laser theater. I’d have loved to see both Dunkirk and The Last Jedi on IMAX film, but the nearest theater for that was 5 hours away. As it was I had to drive two hours just to get to the laser theater.

Based on these experiences (and seeing The Dark Knight, The Dark Knight Rises, and Interstellar all on 70mm IMAX film) I’d definitely say if you have the chance to see a movie on actual IMAX film, do it! It’s amazing! If you’re a serious film nut (like me) it’s worth driving as far as you have to at least once. If you can’t do that, imax laser is actually a very close second. If you decide to see something in 3-D, Imax 3-D (even if it’s just the regular dual 2K IMAX projectors) is the best I’ve seen.

Post
#1163947
Topic
Rogue One * <em>Spoilers</em> * Thread
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

It seems like a lot of people have the idea that in order to enjoy a movie they have to like, defend, and justify every single aspect of it.

I don’t think so. I don’t love the idea of Star Destroyers entering atmospheres, the Evazan cameo, or the lack of Moroff screen time to name just a few. It’s not a perfect film at all, but it’s still a film that I really love.

And I really dig Vader in this movie and enjoy discussing and debating his appearance in it.

ray_afraid said:

Mocata said:

Vader should have said “Needa hand there, Captain?” to stay in character.

Yes. This is exactly the level the R1 pun is on. Vader didn’t talk like that.

I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I don’t think Vader’s actual pun is nearly as lame as that. In fact, I think it sounds very much like something he’d have said in the OT (particularly reminiscent of “apology accepted” as he flipping KILLS the guy…) and have no problem with it.

This post has been edited.

Post
#1163901
Topic
Rogue One * <em>Spoilers</em> * Thread
Time

I agree with RRS-1980’s thoughts. And why does it matter that his joke is specifically a pun? It’s WELL established he is wryly sarcastic and uses incredibly cruel humor to rub his subordinates’ noses in their own failures. So that’s all ok but only if it’s NOT a pun? Why is Vader limited in what type of cruel jokes he’s “allowed” to make?

I’m admittedly biased b/c R1 is now firmly my third favorite Star Wars movie closely behind SW and ESB. But I think they did a GREAT job with Vader in R1. My only criticism is he does look a little off sometimes in the scene with Krennic both in movement and the way the costume fits. But it’s been decades since the OT was filmed and they obviously had to make a new costume and find a new actor. I think they did a great job recreating Vader from the OT in all respects. I mean, even the shots where he looks a little “off” aren’t THAT bad. Nothing like how lame he looked in ROTS.

Post
#1162772
Topic
The Toys That Made Us. A documentary series.
Time

I watched this the other day too. It was pretty neat. I also watched the He-Man episode which was just as interesting. I had no idea that He-Man was created as Mattel’s direct response to the crazy success of Kenner’s Star Wars line. They even called him their “Star Wars killer”! No spoilers, but Skeletor’s inspiration is mind boggling, and truly scary. They only scratch the surface in the show, but a quick google will turn up the full morbid tale!

Post
#1161385
Topic
General Star Wars Random Thoughts Thread
Time

I always just assumed lightsabers had a sort of deadman switch built in. It could easily be based on touch-sensitive technology. As long as you’re gripping the handle it will stay on.

As for throwing it, maybe they have a control that can lock it on for a time limit or until an impact of a certain G. Or just use the Force to keep it on while it flies.

Post
#1161126
Topic
Little Men, Little Wars - Share Your Star Wars Collection
Time

So I’ve begun testing the waters of 6 inch (1/12 scale) action figures over the last year. It’s a fun scale that can capture really good detail that sometimes rivals the 1/6 (12 inch) figures, but at at fraction of the cost and required shelf space. Plus, the modern 6 inch figures tend to be some of the best articulated figures ever made in the history of toys.

Anyway, I’ve got a few of the Hasbro Black series. I’ve been very selective, but it was the 40th Anniversary Darth Vader that sucked me in. It is a total home run and arguably one of the best Darth Vader figures ever made. I’ve also got a bandai 1/12 Stormtrooper model that is fantastic, but I haven’t had time to build it yet… I eventually want to get at least a second Stormtrooper and a bandai Death trooper kit to complement the Hasbro death trooper. Finally, I’ve got the Medicom Mafex ROTJ Boba Fett. It’s another total home run. One of the coolest ection figures I’ve ever owned. The obsessive nerd in me desperately wants to get the mafex ESB Fett as well now. I’ve also been getting some of the mafex DC superheroes like Batman and Wonder Woman and they are just too cool.








To the top