logo Sign In

Dek Rollins

User Group
Members
Join date
6-Apr-2015
Last activity
13-Mar-2024
Posts
3,298

Post History

Post
#1375197
Topic
How do you feel about Star Wars being re-titled A New Hope in 1981?
Time

Handman said:

That wasn’t the point of my original post either. But you asked for me to elaborate on the Star Trek quote like you couldn’t figure out what I meant.

“No” is a bit vague. You could have meant that the DC of Star Trek II is a fundamentally different film and that it is considered such, disputing the point I was making.

Post
#1375192
Topic
How do you feel about Star Wars being re-titled A New Hope in 1981?
Time

Handman said:

Dek Rollins said:

Handman said:

Dek Rollins said:

The DC of Star Trek II isn’t a different movie, it’s just a better version of the same movie.

No.

My feelings on this issue are pretty standard for a Star Wars purist. Dumb title and it messes up the timing of the music to the crawl. I call it Star Wars when I can. “The original Star Wars” when people get confused.

Mind elaborating what you’re responding to here?

Star Trek II’s Director’s cut is not better than the theatrical cut.

I beg to differ, but that wasn’t the point of what I was saying anyway.

Post
#1374414
Topic
Last movie seen
Time

ChainsawAsh said:

You’re, like, the first person I’ve seen anywhere that didn’t think it was excellent. I’m surprised. I thought it was the most successful “decades too late” comedy sequel I’ve ever seen.

I’m surprised by the ridiculous amount of praise it’s getting.

It’s not like it has zero redeeming qualities though. I liked their daughters as characters, but they were kind of boring because they were too intelligent. They copied the dopey Bill & Ted mannerisms, but they’re not written dumb enough.

The only “decades too late” comedy sequel I’ve liked is Pee-wee’s Big Holiday.

Post
#1374377
Topic
Last movie seen
Time

It sucked. Such a disappointment. It felt like they didn’t have any idea what to do with the story. The plot is nonsensical even by Bill & Ted standards. There was so much potential in a third installment, and they wasted that potential on this forgettable trash.

Why is space-time literally collapsing unless they write one single harmonious song? Why is it one specific song (allegedly before the cop-out ending)? They already broadcast to the entire world at the end of the second one. Their music brought piece on Earth, it wasn’t some magical song that literally saves the universe from destruction.

And somehow the people in the future… didn’t know what happened? Like, how am I supposed to suspend my disbelief? Why did they think this script was good enough to spend a twenty-five million dollar budget on? Why did they waste all that money on crappy CGI effects that make me wanna puke in a story that doesn’t need to exist? And on a movie that looks, visually, like crap.

And the plot they went with just repeats things that happened in the first movie but boring. Hey, everyone remembers when they grabbed historical figure in a time machine, let’s throw that in there! But this time they don’t kidnap them as if it were a funny movie, they just, politely convince them to come with? And remember when they were sent to Hell? Yeah, let’s just do that again but make Hell infinitely less interesting. That’ll be great. I mean, come on, Bogus Journey was almost nothing like the first one. They’ve traveled through time, they’ve been to the afterlife, what’s the one thing they didn’t do? Space? Why didn’t we get Bill & Ted’s Space STATION? Show us a story about how their music reaches other planets, after they’ve given Earth a prosperous future, because that already happened.

This movie isn’t funny. There are humorous scenes on occasion, but they seriously failed at making a comedy on par with the first two. Most of the film is just mean-spirited drama mixed with some awkward attempts at humor. In the original films, nearly every scene, nearly every line of dialogue, was funny. They were filled to the brim with jokes. It was almost always played for laughs. Every time they meet their future selves in this movie, it’s just anger and drama. Keanu Reeves also just isn’t there at all. He throws off the chemistry by giving a very bored, phoned-in feeling performance. He didn’t seem to have the character in him, and it makes me wonder if they even re-watched the originals before production.

I was hoping for better from the original creators of the series.

Post
#1374347
Topic
How many good third movies in a trilogy can you name?
Time

Anakin Starkiller said:

Look, I get that it isn’t as high concept as the first film (if you could even call it that), but it’s nice, simple fun. A great romp through and through. Don’t take it seriously, just enjoy the ride.

Every Jurassic Park movie is high concept.

Jurassic Park has a stellar cast of likable and interesting characters, a story that actually has a point, a (mostly) fantastic script, Spielberg’s wonderful direction, etc.

Jurassic Park III has Grant with a cast of boring, annoying characters. The story and script are just plain dumb. It hardly has any redeeming qualities. There are some memorable shots/scenes, but three or four cool visuals can’t save a stupid movie.

I mean, all the JP sequels are crap, so it’s not like Jurassic Park III is alone. The JP sequels are the definition of cash-grab garbage.

Post
#1374111
Topic
How do you feel about Star Wars being re-titled A New Hope in 1981?
Time

Handman said:

Dek Rollins said:

The DC of Star Trek II isn’t a different movie, it’s just a better version of the same movie.

No.

My feelings on this issue are pretty standard for a Star Wars purist. Dumb title and it messes up the timing of the music to the crawl. I call it Star Wars when I can. “The original Star Wars” when people get confused.

Mind elaborating what you’re responding to here?

Post
#1368477
Topic
<strong>4K77</strong> - Released
Time

StarkillerAG said:

Also, I’m with the new guy here. I just did a quick DuckDuckGo search for 4K77, and the download links aren’t there at all. Even searching “4K77 download” gives no info at all. So you could really be more helpful, Jaxer.

Searching torrent instead of download should bring something up. Jaxer’s continued rude responses may have been out of line, but typing in one single search isn’t trying very hard.

Post
#1367601
Topic
Mos Eisley - Restored Sequence (up on youtube - Released)
Time

The “Skywalker Edition” is a project made by SkyDude on thestarwarstrilogy forum. It won’t be finished for a very long time though, and last I checked he was still working on a 1080p proof-of-concept version titled “SkyMaster Edition”. D+77, if I recall, uses Skydude’s version of that speeder shot.

SkyDude’s projects are created using only the 35mm print scanned material with the exception of that shot, as far as I know. From what I’ve seen he doesn’t like the official UHD master.

I honestly don’t know who is actually considered part of “the team” if not everyone involved, but SkyDude has helped TN1 on the ‘official’ TN1 releases before.

EDIT: Sniped, that’s what I get for letting the page sit open without posting. :p

Post
#1367298
Topic
Your DVD Collection
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

Dek Rollins said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

ADDED

WEEDED

How dare you weed the Batman: TAS DVDs in favor of the BD set.

The BD appears to be an over-DNR’d, over-brightened flat picture with inaccurate color. One of these is not like the others.

That said, I’m going off of just the opening since that’s what I saw posted when the set came out and it immediately put me off from spending any money on that.

Post
#1360466
Topic
Info Wanted: Raiders of the Lost Ark - is there a version with original color timing?
Time

Explanation:

Dek Rollins said:

They attempted to digitally fix the registration error on the negative in this scene (the image goes in and out of focus every couple seconds for a few shots), and they made it even worse.

Watching the shots in motion, it appears they cut out parts of an earlier frame, and then animated that 2D shape over the image… poorly. Like, seriously, his eyes and nose just start popping out of his face, and they did the same thing to his shirt. In the torch shot, you can see the original torch moving around behind the photoshop image they stuck over it.

Again about the 35mm LPP scan, I wouldn’t really call it “unfaithful” to the intended look. It’s just a grungy print (a dupe of an original print as far as I know), so darker scenes are very dark and contrasty, and it’s too cool. There is also some sort of fluid stain that lasts the second half of reel 2.

Post
#1360317
Topic
Info Wanted: Raiders of the Lost Ark - is there a version with original color timing?
Time

I used to check out the 2008 DVD from my local library™ and I’m pretty sure I would have noticed.

I know captainsolo has said in the past that the BD 5.1 mix is very revisionist, but I personally don’t know any specifics about it.

EDIT: This video says/shows that the CG Jeep was seen on the Sci-Fi channel in the US. I believe it was also used in a BBC broadcast, but I can’t confirm that.

EDIT 2: DVDbeaver’s page on the 2008 DVD makes no mention of the shot being changed, and the discs are virtually identical.

Post
#1360314
Topic
Info Wanted: Raiders of the Lost Ark - is there a version with original color timing?
Time

No, the boulder rod and snake reflections were removed in 2003, and have been missing since. To my knowledge the CGI Jeep shot was never used on a home video release; it was only used in UK HDTV broadcasts. I think the 2008 DVD was the same transfer as the 2003 DVD.

Anyway, I’m talking about stuff like this: http://www.framecompare.com/screenshotcomparison/999MJNNU

They attempted to digitally fix the registration error on the negative in this scene (the image goes in and out of focus every couple seconds for a few shots), and they made it even worse.