logo Sign In

Bossk

User Group
Members
Join date
10-Mar-2003
Last activity
13-Jan-2008
Posts
9,501

Post History

Post
#39556
Topic
Top Grossing Films of All Time
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/39556/action/topic#39556
Time
Singer was not in it except, for some reason, I think he cameo'd in an episode. Could be wrong.

Yes, I also love V. He was also in a pretty good drama from the early 80s called If You Could See What I Hear where he plays a blind man. It's based on a true story as I recall and he was pretty decent in it. Although it has been a long friggin' time since I've seen it.
Post
#39546
Topic
DVDs of 2004?
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/39546/action/topic#39546
Time
Here's a great DVD release for June 1 (from digitalbits)...

Quote
Das Boot: The Original Uncut Version will be a 2-disc set featuring the original mini-series version that was produced for German TV broadcast in 1981 (running time: 293 minutes). The video will be anamorphic widescreen, with audio in English and German Dolby Digital (note that you'll get the restored original stereo audio as well as a newly created 5.1 mix - in GERMAN we hope). A behind-the-scenes featurette is also included. Can't WAIT for this!
Post
#39543
Topic
Changes in 2004 DVDs
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/39543/action/topic#39543
Time
Quote
Originally posted by: starkiller
If someone colorized this movie, it would remove that symbolism. It would destroy the full intent of the film. Unlike the Florida voter of 2000, Steven Spielberg's intent is not up for debate. He knew precisely what he was doing, and why.

Exactly. Spielberg had a purpose when resorting to B/W film stock. I will admit that movies are made that could take advantage of advances in technology that have not yet been developed. And that's what Lucas is doing. But not all directors want to take advantage of such technology. Spielberg is one. He had a reason for doing it and he did it. And his movie is that much better for having done so. You can't colorize Schindler's List, jimbo.

I hope this forum remains here for the next decade so Jimbo can come back ten years wiser and read through some of his posts that he has up now. I can admit that I had some stubborn beliefs when I was 16 and I have had the ability to look back on some of the things I've said and done. I can't believe I'm the same person sometimes. I chalk his obstinance up to his age. I know you're going to take offense at that, Jimbo, and I'm sorry. But it's the truth. Many of us were the same way. You'll realize it down the road, too.
Post
#39542
Topic
SE Trilogy DVDs' covers
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/39542/action/topic#39542
Time
But won't that warrant a non-qualifier as a title? Meaning, if the ultimate editions, due in 2007, are the way that GL wants them, shouldn't they have the simple, straight forward title of Star Wars instead of the 2004 edition having that name? Why not give the 2004 editions an alternate title like the "Special Edition" so when the 2007s come out, people who are otherwise clueless will know the difference?
Post
#39517
Topic
Make Original Trilogy DVDs available through originaltrilogy.com
Link
https://originaltrilogy.com/post/id/39517/action/topic#39517
Time
They've gotta be loving it. VHS never sold in the numbers that DVD does because of price. And their percentage also goes up since DVD prices are so much lower than videostore copies of VHS are. Videostores still buy their copies, if not more of them since DVDs are so much more affordable, and the general public buys their copies. MacroVision wins both ways.