Sign In

CatBus

User Group
Members
Join date
18-Aug-2011
Last activity
3-Mar-2021
Posts
5,609

Post History

Post
#1381535
Topic
Return of the Jedi: The Destiny Edition v1.0 | Theatrical Reconstruction in 4K (Released)
Time

I’ll make sure Project Threepio is on board with whatever you choose to do (the subtitles are close enough to sync without any modifications – but explicitly putting the name of your preservation in the documentation should help forestall any confusion on the matter)

Post
#1381420
Topic
Return of the Jedi: The Destiny Edition v1.0 | Theatrical Reconstruction in 4K (Released)
Time

Stotchy said:

Jedi is theatrical, Empire is theatrical also (but theatrical and GOUT are the same for Empire IIRC). Are there additional frames in Star Wars theatrical vs GOUT?

For me it’s really about making sure each film syncs perfectly with the latest hairy_hen soundtrack.

Happy to take advice.

Jedi: 4K83 is theatrical and has the latest hairy_hen soundtrack

Empire: Theatrical = PAL GOUT, but has two more frames than NTSC GOUT (at around 1:44:24), 4K80 promises to be theatrical, but the latest hairy_hen soundtrack is NTSC GOUT, so he’d need to make a new one for 4K80. So this is one of those matters where GOUT isn’t descriptive enough because there are actually two GOUT frame standards.

Star Wars: There’s one frame at the beginning of the last reel (at around 1:40:08) excluded from GOUT but is visible on some other pre-SE home video releases, but it was not on the 4K77 print (so there can be some argument about whether that frame is theatrical, but I think it likely is, it’s not unusual for frames to get lost on reel changes). Latest hairy_hen soundtrack is NTSC GOUT.

So assuming you’re waiting for 4K80 before doing Empire, then you’ll be GOUT-theatrical-theatrical, just like 4Kxx.

Post
#1381103
Topic
Return of the Jedi: The Destiny Edition v1.0 | Theatrical Reconstruction in 4K (Released)
Time

I’d like to name this film preservation (soon to be trilogy preservation, I hope) as an officially supported preservation in the next Project Threepio release. I’m assuming since this is based on 4Kxx, you’re planning on sticking to that same frame reference (i.e. GOUT for Star Wars, theatrical for Empire and Jedi). Is that correct?

Post
#1380519
Topic
What's so great about ESB?
Time

pleasehello said:

Are you talking about the last line where he says “I haven’t got time for anything else”?

How is that innuendo?

Seriously? If you’ve gone this long without figuring that one out, I’m not going to be the one to spoil the scene for you. You just go ahead and enjoy the movies your own way.

“Captain, being held by you isn’t quite enough to get me excited.” That’s innuendo.

When someone’s grabbing you in a sexually suggestive manner, I wouldn’t call simply pointing that out and implying it’s very much unwanted “innuendo”. It’s just a lot more polite than pepper spray.

Post
#1380515
Topic
What's so great about ESB?
Time

pleasehello said:

CatBus said:

pleasehello said:

CatBus said:

ray_afraid said:

You mean after he catches her from falling & is clearly trying to listen for something? Yeah. Ok.

Yep, that’s right when she tells him to let go and he doesn’t. She immediately repeats the demand and eventually convinces him to let her go, since his excuse of “I’m only continuing to grab you because I’m unable to hear anything without my grabbers extended” doesn’t seem to be resonating. Then after he makes a sexual innuendo and leaves the room, she punches the wall. That’s the scene, you’ve got it.

He makes the sexual innuendo? It seems more to me that she makes the sexual innuendo.

She tells him his attentions are unwanted and unreciprocated, which draws attention to the existing sexual element of his persistent grabbing.

He responds by going full innuendo.

Here’s the line:

  • Let go, please.

  • Don’t get excited.

  • Captain, being held by you isn’t quite enough to get me excited.

So tell me again who goes “full inuendo”

Seriously? You intentionally leave out the line where Han goes full innuendo and ask me to point at it? That’s preposterous.

“Captain, being held by you isn’t quite enough to get me excited.” - I described this as “She tells him his attentions are unwanted and unreciprocated, which draws attention to the existing sexual element of his persistent grabbing.” And that’s what it is.

Han’s next line, for those who haven’t seen the film, is clear unabashed sexual innuendo.

Post
#1380513
Topic
What's so great about ESB?
Time

pleasehello said:

CatBus said:

ray_afraid said:

You mean after he catches her from falling & is clearly trying to listen for something? Yeah. Ok.

Yep, that’s right when she tells him to let go and he doesn’t. She immediately repeats the demand and eventually convinces him to let her go, since his excuse of “I’m only continuing to grab you because I’m unable to hear anything without my grabbers extended” doesn’t seem to be resonating. Then after he makes a sexual innuendo and leaves the room, she punches the wall. That’s the scene, you’ve got it.

He makes the sexual innuendo? It seems more to me that she makes the sexual innuendo.

She tells him his attentions are unwanted and unreciprocated, which draws attention to the existing sexual element of his persistent grabbing (calling out his “I always grab people and refuse to let go when I listen – I grab Chewie and make him sit on my lap all the time, honest” excuse).

He responds by going full innuendo.

Post
#1380509
Topic
What's so great about ESB?
Time

ray_afraid said:

You mean after he catches her from falling & is clearly trying to listen for something? Yeah. Ok.

Yep, that’s right when she tells him to let go and he doesn’t. She immediately repeats the demand and eventually convinces him to let her go, since his excuse of “I’m only continuing to grab you because I’m unable to hear anything without my grabbers extended” doesn’t seem to be resonating. Then after he makes a sexual innuendo and leaves the room, she punches the wall. That’s the scene, you’ve got it.

Post
#1380403
Topic
A New Hope: Theatrical 1977 stereo mix vs. 1993 stereo mix
Time

We can track things to a new/changed/removed sound effects level, retimed dialogue, alternate takes, alternate dialogue without high-quality sources. We won’t necessarily be able to track equalization, compression, and imaging differences very well without high-quality theatrical sources though. But yeah, with access to the four-track master you could do a branching family tree diagram of every mix, with that as the root.

Post
#1380298
Topic
A New Hope: Theatrical 1977 stereo mix vs. 1993 stereo mix
Time

There was this thread, which covered dialogue differences.

https://originaltrilogy.com/topic/The-Definitive-tractor-beam-Close-the-blast-doors-Blast-it-Biggs-Wedge-you-dont-taste-very-good-Noooooo-Preservation-Guide/id/13428

But that’s a pretty easy topic to cover in a few posts. I think the only thing missing from the discussion is the Empire mono mix, which wasn’t discovered until after that thread was done. The Jedi mono mix doesn’t have any dialogue differences, just missing sound effects. And the UHDs, I suppose.

I think it may be possible to do a similar one for pre-97 audio mixes, but there are just so many changes in the SE’s (and changes to the changes, etc) that it’s likely to sprawl.

Post
#1380295
Topic
International Audio (including Voice-Over Translations)
Time

Okay, I’ve finished syncing the Cantonese dubs, and they’ll be ready do download shortly for those who are interested.

They were 97SE dubs, and I’m no aficionado of the various Special Editions, so I never know which version of the SE I’m syncing until I get to key parts. And every time I hear the Emperor scream when Luke falls into the chasm, I laugh. It is just so ridiculously wrong every single time. And the dubbers rarely if ever dub over the scream, probably because they can’t agree which voice actor should do the yelling. It’s clearly not Luke or Vader, so which dubber would scream? Same with the “No! Nooo!” added to ROTJ – the Thai dub has a completely different actor otherwise not in the scene doing it (which makes it authentic to the English, at least). Who’s yelling? How does it make sense for them to yell as opposed to someone else in the scene? These are really difficult questions, and I don’t envy dubbing outfits trying to make sense of these scenes.

Anyway, although the sound effects were off from the dialog by up to almost half a second, the voice delay was generally consistent within a scene, and I was able to bring the sync back enough that it at least appears that both sound effects and voices are in sync, even if I cheated a bit to make it happen. These may also be the only mono Special Edition dubs we have, but they’re good quality, albeit with pretty compressed dynamics. And they’re despecialized, so there’s no screaming Emperor in ESB anymore.

One more oddity about these dubs: I think these dubs may contain the first line I’ve found that wasn’t dubbed due to the dubbers not realizing it needed to be dubbed (as opposed to being an incomplete/damaged recording of the dub). In ROTJ, when C-3PO is doing story-time with the Ewoks, he says one line in English in the middle of otherwise Ewokese gibberish: “Yes, R2, I was just coming to that.” Well, the gibberish was identical to the English track, but that one line is still in English! So in the next Project Threepio, there will be Cantonese titles-only subtitles to accompany these new dubs, which also subtitle that one line.

Give them a listen. And if you happen to know someone with access to the Mandarin dubs, you know who to contact.

Post
#1380269
Topic
What's so great about ESB?
Time

GlastoEls said:

Complicated, and only cited for a contrary opinion: https://decider.com/2015/05/04/han-solo-star-wars-secret-feminist/.

Not actually that contrary. The gist of the article is that he likes Leia for who Leia is: her brains, her character, her wit, which doesn’t seem that controversial or complicated. The logical leap is that this somehow makes him a feminist. No, it just means his feelings for her are genuine, that’s all. Love doesn’t make you a feminist, it makes you human.

He harasses her. In the same way a zillion other male heroes throughout literature and film harass their own love interests. Some with genuine feelings of love, some superficial. All of them are normalizing a form of sexual pursuit that’s far too common in real life, and much more insidious than it is usually presented onscreen.

Post
#1380247
Topic
What's so great about ESB?
Time

canofhumdingers said:

She’s clearly in control of any situation she’s placed in with any of her “suitors” throught the OT.

Yeah, I wouldn’t go as far as predatory either. But her side of the story is that she plays the sexual harassment game. She’s in control in the sense that she willingly plays along. It’s all just well-meaning banter, it’s even charming. This isn’t just Empire, this is commonplace throughout film in general, and more overt in older films and literature. The man harasses, and the woman, whether she opts to fight back or not, ultimately blushes because harassment is just so flattering. That’s the problem. It’s the storyline in general, not whether Leia can handle herself within that storyline.

Watching it today, there’s some wincing in parts, as with many older films with this type of romance. Not because Empire is particularly bad in this regard – in fact, I’d say it’s better than its contemporaries – but because writers from that time period regularly normalized this sort of thing, that’s all. That said, I cheer a little inside when Han asks Leia’s opinion of where they should go next when they’re drifting in the Anoat system. It’s a little seemingly inconsequential moment that helps give their relationship a much-needed sense of partnership. It’s not all bad.

Again, Empire is a classic film and a favorite of mine. I love Casablanca as well too, but I also wince at how Sam is treated, even though I know it was very progressive for its time. There’s no such thing as a timeless film.

Post
#1380236
Topic
What is your main way of watching the Original Trilogy?
Time

ZkinandBonez said:

I’m assuming then that “grain management” is done on new movies shot on film as well? Could that be why a lot of new movies shot on film end up looking so digital?

I’m sure to some degree it is, some films more than others (heavy post-production modification is a hallmark of modern film since Amelie and O Brother Where Art Thou?), but fine-grained filmstock and large format filmstock can look relatively grain-free compared to the chunky, grainy filmstock of the seventies. Your modern 35mm film will look more like Lawrence of Arabia than 4K83 even without any degraining – much more subtle.

Agreed about color grading. It’s necessary to regrade films for Blu-ray, but people don’t seem to have as much of an interest in color fidelity as they should. It often doesn’t even seem to be a goal at all.

Post
#1380181
Topic
What is your main way of watching the Original Trilogy?
Time

ZkinandBonez said:

I can’t imagine this is necessary in order to clean up old films in general?

Blu-rays of old films aren’t made from projection prints because projection prints, in most cases, don’t have enough fine detail to make complete use of 1080p resolution. People like all the extra detail Blu-ray had the capacity to reveal, and 35mm negatives give us the ability to provide all that and more, so I don’t really blame anyone for doing what they do in this respect.

But if you go back to the negative or something like it, you’ll usually have to redo the color grade, because the colors on the negative frequently look nothing like the film as it was originally projected. And usually there’s some other cleanup people do as well. “Grain management” is part of the modern restoration workflow of any film-based movie, but what the grain management entails can vary. Degrain/regrain is one of the blunter tools in that toolkit, and all I can say for sure is that it’s used a lot, and it was used on the 2011 Blu-rays.

Post
#1380104
Topic
What's so great about ESB?
Time

canofhumdingers said:

What’s wrong with the romance between Han and Leia? Their back and forth banter is one of the oft-cited strengths of the film, and I agree. Their chemistry on screen is really fun and engaging.

It’s basically the “boy sexually harasses girl until she gives in” storyline. It’s very well done for one of those, but that’s the core. There’s also moments that undercut that angle and add a little more depth and real connection, giving Leia a little more agency in the relationship, I’m not denying that either, and the onscreen chemistry is undeniable. But it’s definitely a problematic part of Empire IMO.

That said, Empire is my favorite film of the trilogy by far. But if I’m giving advice to my sons about how to approach romantic relationships, “Don’t be like Han Solo” is right up there.

Post
#1380098
Topic
What is your main way of watching the Original Trilogy?
Time

ZkinandBonez said:

CatBus said:

The 2011 Blu-ray grain is mostly fake grain, so it doesn’t really represent the films as they would normally appear. Nevertheless, the negatives would still have quite a bit of natural film grain – less than the 4Kxx projects, but maybe only slightly less than 4K83. The real odd-looking ones are the UHD’s. The only significant grain to be found on them is frozen grain.

I’ve heard of Blu-ray releases “de-graining” old films, but I’ve never heard of adding fake grain. Why would they do that?

It’s pretty common. They degrain the film first, so that they can do major image enhancements without the grain causing weird effects (i.e. so you can boost the yellows or the sharpness without having yellow/extra sharp grain, also for 3D conversion so you don’t end up with 3D floating grain). Then, because the image looks like crap without grain, they add it back in at the end, after all the image adjustments have been made. People blame Lowry for inventing the degrain/regrain process, and I’m not sure where it really started, but it’s widespread. Some places go through more effort than others to make the added grain look natural and filmstock-accurate. Rarely does the film end up looking as grainy as a film (negative) from that period really would, so the whole process is still a net loss of grain (so a “de-grained” Blu-ray likely still has added fake grain). In these cases, the grain that’s there isn’t from the film, it’s from a computer. “Filmic” is what reviewers tend to call it when it works well.

What the UHD versions of Star Wars are is the version prepped for 3D conversion (so scrubbed as completely as possible of grain), but the 3D project was abandoned. Normally such a film would be fake-grained back up before a 2D release, but apparently nobody got the memo.

Ideally you wouldn’t bother degraining and regraining, but film negatives often have wildly differing colors than the original projection prints, so if you have a process that starts with scanning negatives (and people tend to like seeing all that extra fine detail on their Blu-rays that comes from the negatives), color grading and grain management usually just have to come with the package deal. But as with everything, there’s how to do it right, and how to do it cheap, and you can get wildly different results.

For an example of what they’re trying to avoid through degraining, mess with the sharpness setting on your set. Go ahead and turn it up to 11, then watch a grainy movie. It’s… not right. Also keep in mind that most displays are sold with default sharpness settings that are not zero, so grain really does genuinely look wrong for most people, because their sets are pre-configured to make grain look bad. The correct setting for sharpness on your display is always zero.