If you changed the title and some minor references, it would be completely its own thing.
And would have probably gotten less flak since it wouldn’t be a failed attempt to be something it’s not…
I assume most studios would not give Guy Richie $75 million to make an original spy movie. But if it has an established franchise attached to it…
nothing to do with what the T.V. show had established.
This is precisely why I liked it. It completely ignored remaking the TV show (a remake of which would have probably been awful.) It’s basically a fun Guy Richie Spy movie. If you changed the title and some minor references, it would be completely its own thing.
I am also very sure the IMAX version I saw used the bluray colors. (It did have some frozen grain artifacts not on the bluray, but I assume that was the IMAX DMR upscaling.)
Here we go (though it is mostly a proof of concept and you would probably want to redo it):
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/STAR-WARS-EP-V-REVISITED-EDITION-ADYWAN-Suggestions-now-closed/post/689557/#TopicPost689557
Here's an archive that has 3 different versions for ROTS (including the original art before they redid it to make Vader's head larger.). It also has TPM, although the contrast will need to be adjusted. I don't have a good version of AOTC.
http://www.mediafire.com/download/3x19w62sjblzaen/struzan.zip
Video Collector did nice scans from an art book for his custom bluray covers, so you might want to pm him and see if he still has those.
ShaneLSD said:
I've recently capped and put on myspleen a 720p and 1080i Australian hdtv copy though its still from the laserdisc master its probably the best we have until a 35mm can be privately scanned.
You should edit your post to remove the direct Myspleen link. It's against forum rules.
dvdmike said:
Ok got the video at 23.976 and the 5.1 track synced added the commentaries but cannot for the life of me get the mono to sync!
Do you still have this version? If you could upload it, I could give a stab at syncing the mono.
Sorry to keep reviving this old thread, but the bluray for this is criminal.
Any updates here? I would love to see this.
dvdmike said:
Yep on JP sorry, the notes on the release say the rears were lowered in the mix
They were describing how they created the final track from the dts track. The rears were lowed to conform to the theatrical dts standard, I believe.
AntcuFaalb said:
Ugh, more resolution. I just want >8-bit color. :o(
The upcoming spec for 4k blurays supposedly uses the Rec. 2020 color profile.
If you notice, all of that is from 2013. Firefox now has support for Media Source Extensions and it's enabled by default in the Windows and Mac versions. (It's not enabled by default on Linux as there are still bugs to work out).
Upgrade to the latest Firefox (or Safari) and it will work fine. You don't need any extensions.
You can see if your browser supports Media Source Extensions here: https://www.youtube.com/html5. The current version of Firefox should have all the boxes checked except "MSE & WebM VP." Don't run outdated browsers.
TV's Frink said:
But how is that revenge? When the loop is closed, the younger one gets a big payday and all his buddies celebrate with him.JEDIT: How did you spoilerize that?
I guess it's not really much revenge at all. Ultimately "so that there would be a movie." probably works the best. I guess you could rationalize it as "he saw that a looper tried to kill him, so he closed all the loops to try to prevent that from happening again."
I googled and found an article with the director were he says:
“Or is he doing it because he’s come to power and he’s wiping everything out? It’s a good question.” says Johnson, suggesting there’s really no answer.
Really, most of the movie's logic doesn't work or really matter outside of the direct narrative (as is common with time travel movies). I do have a question though: They shoot old Joe's wife in the future after making such a big deal about how hard it is to kill in the future. Why didn't they just send her back in time to be killed?
To spoilerize: The text input here lacks an html editor, but still allows formatting from pasted sources. Just do the spoiler in a text editor (black highlighter) and paste it in.
TV's Frink said:
Looper (2012)
This was really great, as long as you don't get too tied up in the time travel issues. One thing I couldn't figure out, and I'm sure I'll feel dumb once someone explains it, is why The Rainmaker was closing all the loops.
I assumed that it was because he knew his mother was killed by a Looper and wanted revenge.
Funcha said:
I'm kind of surprised nobody has taken the Ultimate Hunter Edition Blu, color corrected it and added a grain plate. Curious if that could make it look better than the first edition Blu...
No. The Ultimate Hunter Edition is literally just the old Bluray master with some color differences and an absolutely ridiculous amount of DNR applied to it. It's bafflingly bad. It has no factors in any way that might make it a better source than the old Bluray.
Sweet, thank you.
The Aluminum Falcon said:
captainsolo said:
From what I've heard the German FAFDM used MGM's transfer but did so without the extra processing and DNR MGM applied so that specks, dirt and grain are more visible.
This is true, yet I still stand by my assessment that the IT BD looks better overall than the DE BD. The MGM master, even with the extra processing taken off, just looks terrible to my eyes.
That said, the IT does not have English audio. Though, both the 5.1 and mono have been synced to it, the latter by a member of this forum.
I would agree. The IT has much better colors and looks more natural, even if it is softer. The German/MGM transfer has worse colors and a ton of a lot of sharpening and edge enhancement.
The major difference between the German and MGM version is that the MGM has an auto dirt remover applied. Other than that they look the same. I don't think the MGM has any noticeable waxy-style DNR applied to it compared with the DE.
Who synced the mono to the IT? I would love to get that.
This looks nice!
Has anyone tried just using colormatch or something similar to match it to the despecialized colors? You would obviously have some issues with the contrast because the bluray source has some black crush, but it"s worth a shot.
This release with quality colors would honestly be a great version of ESB.
Here you go:
http://www.mediafire.com/view/wl48n5xif89vm98/swadyanhr2.jpg
And for future reference, the current DVD cover thread is still going strong.
AntcuFaalb said:
msycamore said:
Which means these alterations so far...
* Pan American Clipper Matte Painting: DVD / BBC HD / WOWOW / Canal + HD
* Flight to Nepal: DVD (??? BBC HD / Canal + HD ???)
* Cliff Matte: BBC HD
* Lamppost Matte: BD
(For now) assuming color, reframing, burned-in subtitles, and audio changes are not important, then does that mean that the only altered shot in the WOWOW is the clipper one?
I think the WOWOW also has the digitally painted-out pole in the bolder scene, right? And the snake glass touch-up (which they all do).
Does anyone have a comparison of the BD Lamppost Matte with the Laserdisc or something? That change seems particularly bizarre, as they rolled back most the digital tweaking from earlier releases and then introduced a new one.
Edit: Sorry, wrong thread. Please ignore.
skoal said:
How often do we have an accurate reference on how it looked in theaters?
Almost never. Discussions on this forum mostly revolve around cases where it is blatantly obvious that something is wrong. The 2nd dvd/1st bluray of Ghostbusters amps up contrast to detail crushing extremes, and many complained. This was fixed with the later 4k bluray. Other threads talk about improperly modern (teal/orange style) recoloring of old films. As you mention, it is often impossible to know what the original colors of a film are, but sometimes modern tinkering looks very wrong on old films and colors of earlier releases are preferable.
If you want to continue this topic, it would probably be a good idea to make a new thread in off topic, as this sub-fourm is more for active preservation or projects.
skoal said:
Many people post on here saying something about black-crush or white-blow-out, but don't explain the context of why that is bad in the context they are talking about. However, I would think, black-crush and white-blow-out are not inherently bad and mostly dependent on direction and production.
Perhaps why thinking of what black-crush and white-blow-out is wrong and my interpretations are below.
Black Crush -> when 2 pictures of the same scene have some dark (or shadow) details replaced with black
White Blow Out -> the opposite of black crush, when 2 pictures of the same scene have details replaced with white.
For anyone who got this far, I bring this up because I see lots of posts here and else where saying this version is bad because of black-crush or white-blow-outs, and that makes no sense.
You are correct, there is nothing inherently wrong with this and this is frequently used in the production of many films. The problem arises when new releases of old films have had their contrast and color timing screwed with. This is a preservation forum, and people want their disks to look somewhat close to how they looked in theaters.
_,,,^..^,,,_ said:
Let's say that BD 4K has the "right" color grading, but it has also contrast problems, while the BD pre-4K has the right contrast, but not the color grading... well, as the contrast problems could not be completely solved, we could just regrade the BD pre-4K using the BD 4K as color reference...
No. The 4k has the best contrast of all the released discs. The pre-4k blu-ray is the one with contrast problems (the frequently blown out whites are clearly wrong). In the comparison shot you posted, you can clearly see that both faces and the smoke are overexposed in the pre-4k blu-ray. In another comparison shot from page 3 of this thread you can see that the pre-4k bluray looks atrocious with ridiculous blooming whites, while the 4k remaster has natural contrast that preserves detail.
The 4k blu-ray is the best home media release of the film. The only reason this thread got restarted is that jedimasterobiwan thinks the 1999 DVD is somehow more accurate.... or something..... I don't really understand how he thinks.
,^…^, said:
It seems that the pre-4K BD color grading is similar to old DVD (and maybe HDTV):
Yes, and that (2nd) DVD was widely criticized for being way too bright and blowing the highlights out. The first bluray just recycles that transfer. The 4k bluray definitely has the best colors of any home media release so far. (The first dvd is murky and pink and the 2nd DVD/1st Bluray is way too bright.)