ChainsawAsh

catofong said:

that's the point I don't feel like contacting them as I  don't know him anymore

And what makes you think any of us would feel more comfortable contacting them?  We've never known them.  You have.

Yeah, but I don't know of any dual-layered, dual-sided Blu-Ray discs, so 50GB is currently the limit.  I've never much seen the point in dual-sided discs other than space-saving - if you're gonna split it up anyway, why not just use two discs?  There's much less chance of damaging the disc, and dual-layered, dual-sided DVDs are notorious for fucking up all the time.

I'm more interested in these 16-layer 400GB discs that Pioneer is developing ...

I happen to think that episode titles on the spine are entirely unnecessary, but it's really an aesthetic choice.

I've also got a suggestion for the ESB spine logo, something I did a while back for an old cover ... let me try and dig it up or recreate it and I'll get back to you ...

Why?  If you tell us what you're using it for, it might help us to figure out what exactly it is that you're looking for.

I'm of two minds about LFL's decision to release Star Wars without the "Episode IV" tag on the GOUT.

On the one hand, I'm very glad, as it means the video side is exactly what was seen in theaters in 1977 instead of more of GL's revisionist BS.

On the other hand, it pisses me off to no end that they clearly have a good-quality print of the original but didn't use it - after all, it's VERY clear that the entire first shot is a brand-new transfer from the original elements, and it looks pretty damn good.  That alone was as much an insult to the fans as the decision to release the 1993 letterbox LD masters was - "Yeah, we *said* this is all we have, but we're gonna show you just a little bit of what we *really* have, just to show you that we *could* do what you ask, but we're not going to."  Ugh.

As I sit here, it's 3 AM local (Chicago) time, and while I'm very, very tired, I can't get to sleep.  At all.

While I've never been diagnosed with insomnia, I consider myself to be an insomniac.  I can never fall asleep any sooner than an hour after I lie down, unless I've been smoking marijuana (the only thing that seems to help at all - which I have none of at the moment).  Usually it takes me between one and three hours (typically somewhere in the middle) to fall asleep, and those hours are spent inconveniently tossing and turning in my bed.

At this point in my life, it typically doesn't bother me - I'm more or less used to it, and expect that I won't fall asleep right away.  But some nights, usually once or twice per month, I just can't sleep at all.  No matter what.  Tonight seems to be one of those nights - I went to bed at about eleven or so, and I've been lying there for four hours.  I got sick of it and decided to get something to drink, and now here I am.

So I was wondering if anyone here faces similar problems sleeping, and if any of you have advice for me on how to fall asleep more easily and more quickly.  Weed doesn't count, since I know it helps, and I don't have any so it won't help me now. ;)

Any tips would be greatly appreciated, and I'm sure would also help out others on the forum who suffer from similar problems.

This is disappointing.  If there's ever a franchise in need of new life, it's Highlander - while I enjoy the first film, it's essentially an intriguing concept that isn't done nearly as well as it could have been.  This doesn't seem like it's improving upon the original in any way.

"DIGITALLY REMASTERED" doesn't appear to be centered properly - either "DIGITALLY" is too far to the right, or "REMASTERED" is too far to the left.  But other than that, it looks quite nice, and I'm particularly fond of the sideways-Death Star on the back - as Darth Solo said, refreshingly different :-)

Some of the blimp effects at the end are clearly temp effects, especially one of the explosion effects.  As far as I know, this is exactly what was shown at Cannes - it wasn't all temp effects, it's just that there were a few that were unfinished.  If I'm not mistaken.

Would you download a 40-gigabyte file without knowing exactly what it is?  Cut these guys some slack!  What they're asking isn't unreasonable - you're being unreasonable.

Wow, no Eddie Izzard fans here?  I'm surprised - no one got the "Cake or death" reference.

Eddie Izzard on the British:

"We stole countries!  That's how you build an empire.  We stole countries with the cunning use of flags!  Sail halfway round the world, stick a flag in.  'I claim India for Britain!'  And they're going, 'You can't claim us.  We live here!  There's five hundred million of us.'  'Do you have a flag?'  'We don't need a flag, this is our country, you bastard!'"

Later, on how Brits always play Imperials in Star Wars:

"What is it, Lieutenant Sebastian?"
"It’s the Rebels, sir.  They’re here."
"My God, man!  Do they want tea?"
"No, I think there after something more than that, sir.  I don’t know what it is ... but they’ve brought a flag."

...

I think I'll hold off on posting any more excessively off-topic posts in this thread.  It's starting to get a bit out of hand.  But I'll leave this one since the joke does contain a Star Wars reference.  And everyone really should watch some of Eddie Izzard's stand-up, even if he does dress in drag for some inexplicable reason.

You!  Cake or death?

That's what Janskeet was talking about - the faster you travel, the closer you get to the speed of light, the shorter an amount of time it feels to you.  This is the concept the original Planet of the Apes is based upon.

That's exactly what I've always thought, Ripplin.

Yeah, neither Star Wars nor Star Trek really fit in the realm of "hard" science fiction.  Hyperdrive and warp speed are both storytelling devices that allow the characters to travel impossible distances over a short period of time.

But to get "technical" about it, I've always understood hyperdrive to be a way to punch through our universe into another one where the laws of physics as we know them don't apply ("hyperspace"), allowing them to travel much faster than the speed of light would be in our universe with none of the negative effects.

Janskeet said:

Second, I will be reducing and removing the sounds made by the Rontos.

First, those aren't Rontos, they're Dewbacks.

Second, this is one of the few problems I had with ANH:R - Ady should have just gotten rid of the two added SE shots.  I don't mind the CG alterations to the shot that was there in 1977, I just think the two extra ones add nothing to the scene and drag it out unnecessarily.

And I still think removing Han's smile is a dumb move, and I don't see how you can think it's bad acting or whatever it is about it that bothers you.

Yeah, he did - he painted the front himself as well, and if I remember right he'll be doing the same for the rest of the Revisited saga as well.

I've never understood why a TV show-turned-movie being an "extended episode of the series" is a bad thing.  People complained that all the first X-Files movie was was a long episode - but isn't that basically what you'd want to see?  A feature-length installment in the series?  If you try to make it too different you run the risk of it not being enough like the series it's based on.

And I don't see how you can say that TMP isn't a "glorified television episode" - it's painfully obvious that that movie was intended to be a TV episode, but got a lot of extra B.S. added to it to pad it out to a feature-length story.  If any of the films deserve that title, it's TMP.

Vaderisnothayden said:

ChainsawAsh said:

FanFiltration said:

I don't think William Shatner did that bad of a job directing the actors.

This is true, however Shatner should never be allowed to direct himself in anything ever again.  I can't remember which part it was precisely, but there was one moment during the film that made me laugh out loud because Shatner just overdid it so much.  I know he's never been known for being a great actor by any means, .

You obviously aren't up to date with recognition he's received for Boston Legal. Won one Gloden Globe for Boston Legal and one Emmy. Nominated for three other Emmies for Boston Legal. Won another Emmy for playing the same character on The Practice. Nominated for Screen Actors' Guild award for Boston Legal.

 

Um ... I watch[ed] Boston Legal.  I enjoyed it very much.  And I don't think Shatner deserved any of those awards, as his performance as Denny Crane was just as overacted as anything else he's ever done.  That's not to say I didn't love every second he was on screen - I just don't think his performance was award-worthy.

And just because someone wins awards for acting doesn't immediately mean they're a good actor, which is something that's a matter of opinion anyway.  That's like attacking me for hating Million Dollar Baby because it won the Oscar for Best Picture.

--edit--

And I'm shocked that you defend Shatner's performance while saying Ricardo Montalban's is vomit-worthy.  They both over-acted the shit out of their respective roles, but each was enthralling to watch in his own way.  I would never have changed a thing about Montalban's performance as Khan, in Space Seed or Wrath of Khan.  (I'll never understand how his hair went from black to blonde, but whatever - it's the Saavik eyebrow thing all over again.)

FanFiltration said:

I don't think William Shatner did that bad of a job directing the actors.

This is true, however Shatner should never be allowed to direct himself in anything ever again.  I can't remember which part it was precisely, but there was one moment during the film that made me laugh out loud because Shatner just overdid it so much.  I know he's never been known for being a great actor by any means, but most of the other directors throughout Trek's history have done a good job of keeping his overacting in check ... but that doesn't exactly work when he himself is the director.

1) Does anyone actually care about the new show anyway?  I was under the impression it was worse than the prequels.

2) A full season set is coming out toward the end of the year.  It's been confirmed, but no other details have been released, so I have no idea which AR (1.78 or 2.39) they're using for the full season set.

VINH, I think everyone keeps challenging you this way is because you keep acting as if your opinion is gospel and anyone that disagrees with you is an idiot, which makes you look like a dick.

And all art is subjective - I really don't see how anyone could think otherwise.

Jeyl said:

3. may slow down Kane's POV of the face-hugger so we can better see what is happening.

Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of the shot? Sure, it's hard to spot what's going on, but there is merit to it. "Oh, god. What just happened?" can be a lot more effective. The more you see the Alien doing it's thing, the more comfortable one will be with it.

This I happen to agree with - I say keep the face-hugger shot at the proper speed.

Here's what I have:

Star Wars
- 1977 Theatrical Mono - uncompressed WAV, synchronized to GOUT
- 1997 Theatrical Stereo - uncompressed WAV, synchronized to GOUT
- 1985 Laserdisc Stereo - 3 uncompressed WAVs, not combined or synchronized to anything
- 1993 Laserdisc Stereo - uncompressed WAV, synchronized to GOUT (better quality than highly-compressed GOUT audio)

Empire & Jedi
- 1993 Laserdisc Stereo - uncompressed WAV, synchronized to GOUT (better quality than highly-compressed GOUT audio)

Sadly, I don't have the 1980 theatrical stereo mix for Empire (no mono mix for Empire or Jedi exists, and the 6-track surrond mixes are unavailable), or the 1985 laserdisc remixes for either one.

I've heard that the 1983 theatrical stereo, 1985 laserdisc mix, and 1993 laserdisc mix are all identical for Jedi, but I don't think it's ever been confirmed.

I've also heard that the 1980 theatrical stereo and 1985 laserdisc mix are identical for Empire, but I know of at least one difference between the 1985 and 1993 Empire mixes - there's a sound effect of a crashing snowspeeder missing in the 1993 mix.

The Star Wars mono mix is up on Rapidshare, and I can PM you the links if you want.  I can upload the other mixes later on, but probably not today (they're just sitting on my computer hard drive right now).

There are several different audio mixes for Star Wars:

- 1977 theatrical mono (considered at the time to be the "definitive," or "most complete" mix, with many differences, such as a different voice for Aunt Beru, "Blast it, Wedge," instad of "Biggs," different alarm sounds, etc., etc.) - never officially released on home video, but a fantastic restoration taken from two broadcast sources is available (I have the links to the GOUT-synced restoration if anyone's interested, just PM me)

- 1977 theatrical stereo (I'm not too familiar with the differences here)

- 1977 70mm six-track (equivalent to a 4.2-channel mix - L, C, R, Surround, and two LFE, if I recall correctly) - never released after the theatrical run, though the 1997 SE mixes for all 3 films are based on this mix ("You were lucky to get out of there" instead of "You're lucky you don't taste very good" in ESB)

- 1985 LD remix - the one livserge is talking about.  This mix is the one many (if not most) of us here (myself included) grew up with, and is very similar - though not identical - to the theatrical stereo

- 1993 LD remix - the one on the GOUT.  This one was available on the 1993 and 1995 LD releases and the 1995 "Faces" VHS set.  Many new sounds added, such as glass-breaking sounds in the detention cell block fight, etc.

I'm not an authority on sound mixes, but this is what I remember.  Each is distinctly different from the other.  I prefer the mono mix myself, and I'm glad Ady restored a lot of mono mix-exclusive things into Revisited.