I don't think it's perfect, but I do think it might be too episodic to turn it into feature-length stories. The post-Winter Soldier arc would probably be the easiest.
Why not release both a BD50 and a BD25 version and let people choose which to download? Or has that idea already been vetoed?
First off, that was a fantastic season opener!
Second, they clearly didn't get rid of Simmons. The actress is still around, otherwise Fitz wouldn't be hallucinating her. She'll clearly be back as part of the team proper by midseason at the latest (my guess), and in the meantime she'll be around in Fitz's mind.
Third, they did get rid of my favorite new character - I mean come on, how are you gonna kill Lucy Lawless off after one episode?! (I'm fairly sure she'll eventually be resurrected by that 084 somehow, though.)
What about PAL video converted to NTSC? Any problems there?
Depends. It's much easier to go from 25p to 60i through pulldown without affecting speed, but then you're losing resolution (576 down to 480 lines). You could slow down from 25p to 24p, but then you have the inverse problem of 24>25 conversion - you slow the film down by 4%, lowering the pitch in the process, too.
This does present a slight issue for Blu-Ray, even in PAL countries. First, Blu-Ray doesn't allow for 25p, so all PAL-speed BRs are 50i. For an NTSC country release, you either have to slow down to 24p, or do the same 25p>60i pulldown conversion I was talking about earlier. Which is fine, but again, it's interlaced.
So for 25fps stuff on Blu-Ray, it's going to be 1080i unless you slow it down to 24fps. This is why stuff like Planet Earth and Life is 1080i on all releases, and why some recent US Doctor Who releases (like Sperhead from Space) on Blu-Ray are slowed down to 24p (the UK release is 50i).
Really, I don't understand why 25p isn't in the Blu-Ray spec, even in NTSC territories. It's digital video, it's not hard to show 25p on any modern HDTV (50Hz or 60Hz). Maybe with the 4K spec revision that's supposedly coming, they'll add support for 25p (and 48p for that matter - I really want The Hobbit in 3D 48p at home, that was an awesome experience in the theater).
skywalker89 said:
Erik Pancakes said:
PAL would play at the wrong speed...
For me NTSC is the wrong speed, because in cinema it has originally 24FPS, and the 25FPS from PAL are more close to it, than the 29,97FPS from NTSC, also PAL has a bigger resolution from 720x576, but NTSC just 720x480. Also PAL uses a better Color-System than NTSC.
...
But maybe it's just because I'm from Europe and you have to slow down any European language audio to fit to NTSC. Maybe you can give me a reason why NTSC is better, but I don't think so.
Well, movies aren't sped up to reach NTSC's 29.97fps. They're put through a 3:2 pulldown process that preserves the speed of the film. This can cause judder, sure, but as someone from an NTSC country, I don't notice it at all.
Plus, most movies on DVD are encoded in such a way that preserves the 24fps (well, 23.976fps) speed of film - they're on the disc at 24fps, but a flag is set so the 3:2 pulldown is performed by the player. In fact, many Blu-Ray players nowadays can play an NTSC DVD at 24fps exactly, bypassing the 3:2 pulldown altogether.
PAL, on the other hand, speeds everything up by 4% to get to 25fps, making everyone's movements slightly too fast and unnatural, and raising the pitch 4% as well, making the music unbearable to listen to and causing everyone to sound like they took a shot of helium before doing their lines.
So no, PAL's 25fps is NOT closer to the 24fps film standard than NTSC, because even though NTSC is 29.97fps, the 3:2 pulldown applied to get there preserves the speed of the film, which you can't do with acceptable quality in PAL. (I've seen 24>25fps done through pulldown, preserving speed, and it looks terrible.)
For me, preserving the film's speed is more important than a few extra lines of resolution and this "better color" that my eyes will never be able to discern.
PAL would play at the wrong speed, and Team Negative1 hasn't released anything yet.
Haven't seen the Team Blu releases. Frankly, after Harmy's V2's started coming out, I stopped bothering with laserdisc/GOUT-based projects. No offense intended, of course.
Ah, my mistake. Been awake too long for my reading comprehension skills to function properly, it seems.
kk650 said:
Agreed. Not only the quality varies widely from shot to shot though, the colours do too. I am too sensitive to sudden changes in colour during films to watch a release with colours constantly changing from shot to shot.
Really? The colors are the best thing about Harmy's releases if you ask me. I didn't notice any variation at all in SW 2.5 or ESB 2.0, at least nothing that took me out of the movies.
Though I can't fault Dark_Jedi's GOUT V3 in any way. It's a fantastic set.
The big one is Adywan's *Star Wars: Revisited*, of course.
I honestly haven't seen any other OT edits. Well, I think I saw an ROTJ edit by Spence that wasn't bad, but I really don't think ROTJ can be improved that much by editing - either you're just re-arranging scenes, or cutting out as much of the Ewoks as you can, and I don't think either of those things fixes the story problems ROTJ has. It's not like the prequels, where there's an okay story buried under a mound of crap that can be sloughed off to turn them into okay movies - ROTJ is just an okay movie.
HAL 9000 v2 the whole way for me. Seciors' Ep I is also a good alternative if you prefer deeper cuts (no Sidious in his version).
No problem. I just got excited, then disappointed rather quickly because I was waiting for the 1080p. But it's okay, I was going to get the DVD5 anyway to make a copy for my uncle, so all's well!
FYI - the v2 DVD5 that's up on MySpleen now is incorrectly labeled as "1080p." Thought you'd like to know.
Warbler said:
Erik Pancakes said:
I was always under the impression that it was one of the most well-received Batman graphic novels ever written.
then maybe I am confusing it with another Frank Miller Batman graphic novel.
Its sequel - The Dark Knight Strikes Again - is considered one of the worst ever written, so that may be what you're confusing it with. His ongonig All-Star Batman is generally agreed to be terrible, as well.
But The Dark Knight Returns and Batman: Year One (both Miller stories) are definitely very highly-regarded among Batman fans.
I was always under the impression that it was one of the most well-received Batman graphic novels ever written.
Giant guns on his car? You mean like the giant guns on the Batpod in TDK? Or giant guns on the Batmobile in Batman '89?
Seriously, I don't understand how guns on the Batmobile is any different than anything we've seen before in Batman films.
WedgeCyan said:
I only like Raiders. And I don't think it's that weird to only like the original Star Wars. I've never seen a sequel I thought was better than the first one. (yet)
For me, Indiana Jones consists of Raiders and Temple of Doom. The only reason I can sort of enjoy Last Crusade is Sean Connery, but it still doesn't feel like an Indy movie to me, and the less said about #4 the better. And Doom only works for me because they tried to do something legitimately different than Raiders.
I also only really acknowledge the first Back to the Future - #2 is entertaining, and #3 is just campy, but neither feels like it belongs in the world established by the first one. I mean, why give Marty such a crippling flaw (the "chicken" thing) in the sequels? That alone makes him feel like a different character than the BTTF1 Marty to me.
I'm not against sequels as a rule (I'd say The Godfather Part II is superior to its predecessor, for instance), but generally, unless they're planned for in advance, they undermine the original.
And superhero/comic book movies tend to be exempt from all this, as they're designed to be continued on and on. Even then, sequels generally aren't as good as the first (the only exceptions that come to my mind there are Spider-Man 2, The Dark Knight, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and X2 - hell, maybe even First Class or Days of Future Past, too), but even the subpar sequels don't usually undermine what the original was trying to do like "standard" sequels tend to.
I guess my point is, I don't see anything wrong with only liking (or acknowledging) the first in a series.
PAL speedup, maybe?
I, for one, am loving Capaldi. Deep Breath was hit-or-miss (mostly hit, thankfully, but nowhere near great), and while I disagreed with large chunks of the premise to Into the Dalek, I still enjoyed it and thought it did a great job of showcasing Capaldi's Doctor (more so than Deep Breath).
I get that the "darker Doctor" angle isn't for everyone (my brother decided not to continue after episode 2 as well), which is too bad because I honestly think that Capaldi's Doctor is wonderful. He's a dick to everyone and it's magnificent. Clara has much more chemistry with him than she did with Smith, and that's not a dig against Smith because I thought he was great (Series 7 as a whole is my favorite new-Who season so far, even though everyone else seems to hate it).
Moffat and Capaldi seem to be using Hartnell's Doctor as a sort of template for Twelve, with bits and pieces of Pertwee, T. Baker and McCoy thrown in to even things out. He's starting out as a distant, older figure, secure in his own superiority over everyone else (how many "no time for your shit" scenes have we already gotten with Capaldi?) which, of course, leads to his less accessible, more antagonistic nature. It seems clear to me that his arc will be about the softening of his Doctor, with Clara taking the Ian/Barbara/Susan role. I'm going to predict right now that Clara's departure will heavily echo Susan's when it eventually comes, and Twelve will be much more of a lovable old grandpa/mentor by then (but keeping more of an edge than Hartnell did in his last couple seasons).
All this, I suppose, is to say that I really like the direction the show is going. They seem to be reinventing the show by going back to its roots and letting everything (re)develop from there. Of course, I could be wrong and we might just end up with more of the same, but with a grumpy dickhead Doctor - which I honestly don't think I'd have a problem with - but I think people are jumping to that conclusion pretty early. Two episodes is too little to properly judge Capaldi's take on the Doctor. After all, he's been thinking about how he would play the part his whole life - there's definitely more to it than "grumpy dickhead Doctor," and I think we'll see that by the end of Series 8.
Just wanted to chime in and say excellent work, Harmy! I'm too young to have seen the original ESB in theaters (I grew up with the 1992 VHS set), but somehow this manages to feel like the movie I remember watching over and over again as a 5 year old more than anything else I've seen (even the GOUT, which is closer to the quality level I actually saw it at).
You're doing great work. Can't wait for Jedi 2.0!
Oh man, this is awesome! Love the new clip, and the clarity you were able to get out of that deleted scene - very impressive. Looking forward to seeing both versions of this project once finished!
I've been toying with doing this for a while. Haven't been entirely happy with the results of my various tests yet, but once I am, I'll start a new thread for it and post a link to it in this one.
I don't have even a rough timetable, mind you - again, I'm just toying with tests for various scenes right now. I might eventually decide this can't be done to my satisfaction, but I hope that doesn't end up being the case.