I would never say something so stupid either. Well, maybe if was saying something else that’s just as stupid in comparison, but not that same thing 😉.
Wait I think I get it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTyw6cq86kY
Like this? With the black bar all around the picture?
Yes, that is windowboxing.
(windowboxed?)
Yes.
^You’re talking about windowboxing, right? When the image is letterboxed and then pillarboxed around the letterbox.
Here’s the Batman film I want. It’s a late 1930s-early 1940s period film (not specified; set with the visuals), with a Burton-esque visual style (it just won’t be “what if the '40s happened in the '80s”). The entire film will be subtly inspired by aspects of the Burton films.
Batman/Bruce Wayne is somewhat based on the first several comic issues (no moral code; uses guns on occasion, but not often). He will begin his crusade wearing familiar spandex, because it’s the easiest thing to wear when beating up criminals.
He has a Batcave, a Batwing, and a Batmobile. The Batmobile will be the early comics’ red speedster:
At some point in the film, Bruce will realize he can do his job much more safely if he makes his suit less thin and stretchy, at the expense of less mobility, and he also wants to change his style a bit. He makes a new suit that is inspired by the Burton suit, maybe not as stiff. He also has Alfred acquire a new Batmobile:
1938 Phantom Corsair
I don’t have any ideas about a plot, and I probably missed some details in the description, but this is basically the film I want to see happen.
I think what he is talking about is taking tv shows that were shot in 4:3 and older movies also shot in 4:3 and cutting off the tops and/or bottoms to make them 16:9. Am I right?
I can only assume that you’re correct. He said letterbox, which in context doesn’t mean the same thing as cropping to 16:9, so I’ll just wait until he responds to our query.
I actually went with very low expectations. When I came out of the movie, I found myself pleasantly surprised. I don’t know why. But I did enjoy the movie a whole lot more than I thought I would
same here!
=
I smell something fishy… 😉
^Okay. It would be good for everyone to know what we’re talking about. 😄
I just looked up the terms. Windowboxing is when an already letterboxed image gets pillarboxed. An example we should all be familiar with is the GOUT.
I knew this. That’s why I said it’s something different.
This is why Plinkett is needed.
I watched a lot of Plinkett’s reviews of the prequels. He made a few good points, but I disagreed with him a lot.
I also watched CinemaSins’s youtube videos on the Star Wars prequels. They were just as negative but were higher quality and funnier in my opinion.
Cinema Sins is made purely for entertainment and makes no argument as to what makes their nitpicks real problems. Plinkett actually reviews the films in depth and explains why the prequels fail as films, and then fail as Star Wars. He’s right on both counts. The Plinkett reviews are also designed for entertainment, but remove all of the “Plinkett’s a terrible person” comedy and you’ve got reasonable reviews of some crap films.
Movies and TV shows shot in 4:3 but shown letterboxed.
I don’t understand how you can letterbox something that is either the same ratio as the screen or taller, unless you are windowboxing, which is different.
…unless you mean letterbox on the sides rather than the top and bottom.
This is usually called pillarbox, so saying letterbox and meaning pillarbox is misleading.
^I would like a Superman like that. Though, I’m not a fan of all the superheros being in the same universe. I’d like to see that Superman movie, and I have a Batman movie that’s partly planned out in my head. I think I’m going to post that later today when I have more time to type.
B. letterbox movies & TV shows shot in 4:3
I’m sorry for being dull right now, but I honestly can’t figure out what this is referring to.
…Blade Runner is a must. Final Cut is easiest, but revisionist in certain ways. Best of all the is the 1992 director’s cut but it misses the bits of violence from the International version.
The one on Netflix is the theatrical, so it’ll probably be the least trouble to watch.
CGI Yoda is superior [to] the puppet…
Was the wipe the only difference in the ROTS DVD? I thought there was something else, but my memory has a way of being blatantly wrong sometimes.
…I think the CG yoda is superior…
CPY is greatly superior to CCGY.
I recently watched my least favorite Star Wars movie in its theatrical presentation (AOTC blu Ray)…
The BD isn’t its theatrical presentation. 😉
I would watch Top Secret again just for the giant phone gag if nothing else.
You don’t like the JP score? It’s all opinions, but all I know is that ROTS is definitely not “probably his best work”.
The film’s only real high points in my mind is the ending sequence that ties the knot with the OT into a neat little bow, and Lucas’ affinity for composing a story visually really comes into its own here.
That whole sequence is just as endlessly stupid as the rest of the movie. The story was not composed visually, he took the two ends of the stories he had and shoved them together in spite of the fact that they don’t flow into each other naturally that way.
As well as the soundtrack which is probably Williams’ best work to date.
WRONG
Jurassic Park
I find it interesting (and am glad) that they are going with Harrison instead of a recast or continuing with Mutt. It seems like Disney is doing their best to undo all of Georges misdoings.
I’m updating my list:
All are theatrical versions, except AOTC and ROTS, which would be the DVD versions (not Blu-Ray).
It’s okay. We’re but mere humans 😄
I would hope so. Though I’m not sure about Frink. I think he ascended to something above us some time ago.
I’ve watched the video in the past, and I don’t remember anything in either Burton-verse Batman videos having anything that bothered me.
EDIT: And your Batman comparison is invalid, because Batman Returns is a fantastic film, being compared to Batman and Robin, which is a massive crap-fest. The Terminator one works though, as both of those you mentioned are crap-fests.
Fantastic? It’s worse than the painfully average droll that was Batman 89, but nostalgia is one hell of a drug. I’ll let someone else speak for me.
It has a 7/10 on imdb and 80% on Rotten Tomatoes from critics with 73% from the audience. I think 8.5 and above should count as fantastic but that’s just me.
It isn’t as good as Batman, but that’s probably one of the best superhero films ever made IMO, regardless of Rotten Tomatoes. I’ve never understood why people hate the Burton films so much. And your point is further invalidated by using Cinema Sins as your means of telling me why BR is bad. I love CS, they’re funny, but the problems pointed out in the videos are nitpicks that don’t matter, possibly aren’t even actual problems, and are purely for entertainment. They even say that they’ve sinned films that are in their own top 10 lists.
Looks like I’m getting off topic.