ChainsawAsh

RE the guy escaping through the Wall back to Winterfell in the pilot (before he's beheaded by Ned Stark):

It's mentioned in episode 4 (or 3?) that there are tunnels underneath the Wall that the Night's Watch use to get back and forth, as opposed to going over top.  In fact, in the prologue to episode 1, you can see the guy that gets beheaded and the other two walking through one of these tunnels.

Presumably there are no guards at the ends of these tunnels, so a member of the Night's Watch can go through them and desert without anyone knowing.

Though it seems like the horse riders did know that he deserted, so they probably saw him running away from atop the Wall.

This is all conjecture on my part, by the way.  Someone who's read the books might be able to provide more information.

And skyjedi, according the friends of mine who have read the books and seen the series (what's aired of it so far), Game of Thrones is far more faithful to the book than the LOTR films were to Tolkien's books.

I love the show, too.  I was hooked from the first episode.  I wish that all the exposition in episode 4 has been sprinkled throughout the first three so it didn't feel like such an info-dump, though.

I haven't read any of the books, though I think after this season is finished I'm going to read the first one.  I kind of want to watch the entire show fresh, without knowing what's going to happen, so I'm going to try to hold off on reading each book until it's been adapted on screen.

Bingowings said:

Has anyone mentioned Willow Rosenberg yet?

I guess Donna Noble and Amy Pond have earned their Geek points.

You beat me to all three of these.

CP3S said:

Also worthy of mention is her role in Fallout: New Vegas as the only (human) female companion you can have in the game (yes, a redhead).

Well, there's also Cass, another human female companion you can have in New Vegas, who isn't played by Felicia Day.

Although she's a redhead, too...

The "GOUT" was a slap in the face to those of us who want to see the originals preserved properly.  It was the last Lucasfilm product I've purchased, and will remain so until they change their tune about preserving the OOT.

I don't want any sort of digital cleanup or recompositing.  I want them to take an interpositive that preserves the color timing of the original, clean it photochemically, and scan it at 4K.  All effects are exactly as they were in the theater in 1977/80/83, no grain would be removed, etc.

"If you can get the separate elements you MUST recomp them" - no.  You really shouldn't, as recompositing them with modern tools is re-doing them, and is not representative of how the effects were done at the time.

I don't care how much the "artists of the time ... hated the final results."  What they made captivated generations, and to alter it in any way is to do those very same artists a disservice.

Dirt, dust and print damage are a different beast entirely.  Leaving it to preserve how it was is like saying, "I took this photograph in 1945, left it in a drawer, and it got dusty.  I'm gonna frame it, but not clean it first, since that's how it's looked since 1945."

"If we applied your arguments to restoring the OOT there wouldn't be any restoration."

Do you consider the Back to the Future Blu-Rays to have been restored?  They didn't recomposite the effects for that, and it looks magnificent.  That's what I want for Star Wars.

Restoring is about getting it to look as good as it could have looked when it was originally released, not upgrading it to compete with the films released today.

It's true that it was a 29.97 NTSC tape master (D1, I think), but you do want to IVTC back to 23.976 before you author it onto a DVD, so the DVD format can do the pulldown itself, while those with progressive displays won't have interlacing issues.

Problem is, when they authored the GOUT, they didn't IVTC quite properly.  So you'll need to go through and fix the interlacing errors caused by this.

And the color is a good start, but it looks a little green in a few shots, and a little yellow in others (the Ben/Vader duel shot stands out to me as being too yellow).

The GOUT DVD uses the same master as the 1993 Definitive Collection laserdiscs, but it's not a laserdisc transfer.

And the DVNR smearing is not present on the 35mm film (that makes absolutely no sense), but it's inherent in the tape master, so there's absolutely no way to get rid of it, even by going back to the master tapes.

RU.08 said:

It stabalizes the horizontal image shake in the movies, something that would be near impossible to do manually.

No, that can be done in Final Cut.  I know 'cause I've done it before (not for the GOUT, but for other projects).

And removing the DVNR is impossible.  The only way to get a DVNR-free OOT is to use the JSC laserdisc.  Even the 97 SE television broadcasts have really bad DVNR smearing.

Not a big fan of the character.  I've never been a particularly gung-ho patriotic type of person, so the Captain never appealed to me all that much.

Mielr said:

I'm still seriously thinking about that "sticker campaign":

WARNING: These discs DO NOT
contain the ORIGINAL 1977, 1980
and 1983 versions of the Original
Star Wars Trilogy! Buyer Beware!

I'm all for this.  Where do I sign up to get my stickers?

Saw Thor (in 2D - I refuse to see any movie in 3D unless it's shot that way) yesterday evening.

I absolutely loved it.  I mean, at its core, it's a superhero movie, so it wasn't too terribly different from what's come before.  And the scenes on Earth were kind of boring, saved only by Chris Hemsworth's great work as Thor and his rather charming chemistry with Natalie Portman (who is awesome in this, as usual).

What makes it particularly successful is Asgard and the other, non-Earth realms.  It just looks fantastic, and Kenneth Branagh's background in directing Shakespeare really helps to sell the grandiosity necessary for the scenes to work.  And man, do they work - I found myself, once the movie was over, wishing the entire movie had taken place on Asgard entirely.

Loki is easily one of the best of the Marvel movie universe villains, thanks primarily to a great, nuanced performance by Tom Hiddleston.  You actually feel sympathy for him, and you kind of wouldn't mind if he won in the end.  The film would not have been nearly as successful without him, and I'm eagerly awaiting his return in The Avengers.

Speaking of which, the presence of S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent Coulson in Thor is nowhere near as distracting as his/Nick Fury's presence in Iron Man 2.  My only problem with it was the inclusion of Jeremy Renner as Hawkeye (from the upcoming Captain America) in one scene - his scenes were very clearly added in after the fact, and they're kind of distracting.

Bottom line - while it may not be the best of the Marvel flicks, Thor is certainly up there.  I'd say it's better than Iron Man 2 and The Incredible Hulk, but not as good as Iron Man.

I'm definitely a lot more excited for The Avengers now.  Still don't care much about Captain America, but I'll give it a shot.

Interestingly, I just realized that I've seen all of the new Marvel movies in the theater on opening day.  Guess that means I have to do the same for Captain America to keep the streak going...

greenpenguino said:

I would go back and acquire every lost episode of Doctor Who

This.

Meh.  Nice to see the three classic "making of" docs included, but the lack of From Star Wars to Jedi is disappointing.

Still, the inclusion of those docs alone is enough to make it better than I expected.  Still won't buy it, but it's a better set than I anticipated it would be.

Batman most certainly had the same growly voice in Batman Begins and The Dark Knight.  It's more noticeable in The Dark Knight because Bale somehow manages to get more growly with it than in Begins, and Batman himself (not Bruce Wayne) has more dialogue in The Dark Knight, so there's more time to notice the way he speaks.

I just hope they bring it back to Batman Begins levels for the new movie, because I didn't mind it so much then.

The other kind are just for show-off purposes.  It's much easier for someone to grasp what a cover will look like on a shelf when displayed like this:

versus this (which is the image you would print, cut out, and put in a case yourself):

Also, keep in mind that the standard size for a printable DVD cover is:

3240x2175 pixels at 300 dpi
Spine width = 170 pixels, centered

generalfrevious said:

Well, based on what we have heard from LFL, they will just reuse the master they used for the 04 dvds and upscale it to 1080p. It is not going to transferred from actual film elements like most BDs, just reused masters. The same thing happened with the GOUT- they reused the 93 master. So why bother releasing this if it is going to be a half-assed job? But of course it is SW, its going to make millions in its first day, so of course it will be released. But based on discussion on this thread, its going to be a horrible product.

This isn't 100% accurate - the 2004 masters are already at 1080p, so they wouldn't need to upscale them for the Blu-Ray release.  But it's true that everything we've heard leads to the conclusion that they'll just be the same 2004 masters as seen in the HD broadcasts and on the DVDs.

This doesn't mean that this is what will happen, though - maybe they're working on a new master right now.  But based on LFL's history, I doubt it.

Is that better?  But it's so tiny now...

Having seen both parts at the Chicago premiere, I have to say I don't think it was a good idea to have them a week apart.  Part 1 just feels so ... insubstantial without Part 2 coming right after.  They should have made it a 2-hour premiere instead of a 2-part premiere.

For the record, as a single 2-hour "event," as it were, I thought it was very good.  Though I have to say, anyone starting the show with The Impossible Astronaut would be incredibly confused.

Not trying to tell you not to do this or anything, I just thought you'd like to know that there are at least 2 very similar projects out there.

The Lost Chronology (apparently the creator got banned from the forum, not sure what happened there or if he ever finished)

Chronologically Lost

(If either of those links are inappropriate, Moth3r/Jay, I apologize and I'll remove them.)

Alexrd said:

But I still don't see how does it make the Force less mystical, when we are only talking about the link between a being and the Force, not the Force itself.

It makes the link itself less ambiguous and mysterious, which was part of the mysticism in the OT.

We were never sure how someone was able to manipulate the Force - it was implied that people with certain ancestries had more of an aptitude toward Force ability than others ("the Force is strong in this one" clearly implies that Luke has more of a natural Force aptitude than, say, Wedge), but it was never stated outright that only those whose ancestors were Force-users could become Force-users themselves.  There was an implication that some were luckier than others, but those who weren't blessed with the "gift" of the Force could still use it through hard work and dedication, which is why groups like the Jedi and Sith formed (at least, that's what I thought before 1999).

Making a person's connection to the Force tangible and measurable in any way completely destroys this view, meaning that only a certain select few could ever use the Force, no matter how hard they worked or how dedicated they were.  That is my problem with midi-chlorians, and why I think they destroy the mysticism of the Force.

Damn, everybody's jumping on the bandwagon!  I wonder if there's a new season starting...?

Glad to hear you figured it out.  Sorry I wasn't of more use to you, I've been way too busy lately (this being the last month of my last semester in college and all).  If you ever need any specific Encore-related help, shoot me a PM.

Agreed.  So sad.

On a related, but more upbeat note, I got a chance to see the first two episodes of Series 6 at the Chicago "premiere" screening last night!

I don't want to spoil anything for anybody, but damn I don't envy you guys having to wait a week between those two episodes.

Here's what I will say about the opening two-parter (no spoilers, unless you count vague hints as spoilers):

Doctor Who Series 6 Premiere Spoiler-Free Mini-Review
(6.01 The Impossible Astronaut & 6.02 Day of the Moon)

Moffat has stated recently that Series 5 was all about reassuring the audience that, despite the fact that there's a brand-new Doctor, companion, and showrunner, it was still fundamentally the same show.  Hence, the structure was very similar to Series 1-4, and there wasn't a whole lot of "rock-the-boat" type developments.

Series 6, on the other hand, if the premiere is anything to go by, is Moffat basically saying, "Oh, you thought you were safe in your 13-episode, standalone-adventures-with-a-loose-story-arc comfort zone, right?  Well ... not anymore, bitches!"  All bets are off now.  Series 6 is all about Moffat making his mark as showrunner, and it's certainly distinctly different from Davies'.

It begins in a way unlike any other season of the series, and by the time the first 15 minutes have gone by you'll have lost all preconceived notions of what to expect from this season.  More than that, by the end of Day of the Moon (part 2, which will air on the 30th), you're left with at least two potentially-season-spanning arcs that are so mind-bogglingly huge in their implications, they make River Song look about as important as that asshole who got kicked out of the TARDIS in Series 1.

The monsters in the episode are absolutely the best since the Weeping Angels.  Technically, they could exist in the real world.  There could be one standing behind you right now, and you'd never know...

And that's all I'll say.  I've already typed and deleted several paragraphs because I thought they had too many potential spoilers within, so I hope I've kept this mini-review-thing as spoiler-free as possible.

If anyone has any questions or wants more spoileriffic information about the premiere, PM me and I'll gladly oblige.  I won't post any definite spoilers in the open forum, though.

I think "time expanded" means exactly what you said.  Producing programs for TV broadcast is frustrating.  Everything has to be a very specific length.  After editing for content and putting in commercials, they might have needed to pad out the running time a little bit.  Usually they add in a couple deleted scenes (like Ace Ventura: Pet Detective), but apparently sometimes they have to slow it down a bit to get it the right length.

I'm kind of surprised they don't just cram in more commercials...