ZkinandBonez said:
SilverWook said:
Is this the first SW film to have it's own alcoholic beverage? ;)
What's up with C-3PO's red arm? He's got like a Hellboy thing going on.
More like Big Boss' arm/weapon :D
Maybe it's a weapon or some kind of removeable tool, which would explain why he's wearing it.
TV's Frink said:
We'd also enjoy a family-style Italian dinner.
Team Olie
Anyway, I don't like the "RGB color scheme" either, but I think it would be funny to have lightsabers of whatever color too. I liked KOTOR's idea that every color is associated with a specific jedi role, but it annoys me that the sith (why do they even exists!?) are supposed to wield red lightsabers.
team_negative1 said:
As one more preview, here's an update on the newer Intro, and part of the flyover:
===============================
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/k4umJBQE9NOTk4buu03
Team Negative1
The "Star Wars" logo disappears abruptly (maybe the image is too bright?), but otherwise it looks great!
...Nope!
Gort! Altair. Talos. Yavin.
The day the Star Assassin's Scroll stood still?
TV's Frink said:
WRONG FACES!
Team Olie
Thanks for the support. We will continue to post unrelated content hoping you will catch on.
No_Team
----
Anyway, it seems they're making new OT's adaptations: http://www.starwars.com/news/star-wars-adaptation-covers-revealed-presenting-the-new-original-trilogy
In the time of the Old Republic, hundreds of star systems lived together in peace and prosperity, protected by an ancient order of warriors, the Jedi. But a tide of darkness swept through the galaxy, as unstoppable as it was terrifying, wiping out even the most powerful fighters.
So now the Jedi are warriors, not guardians of peace? I always liked the idea of the Jedi as samurai, but even they were not exclusively warriors.
Actually, spice opera...
Anyway, I agree there are tons of better ways to make new Star Wars comics, but so far I think they've picked the wrong ones.
Potential retcon.
DuracellEnergizer said:
The spidercat is ludicrous,
but therein lies its appeal to me.
We know the main protagonists are going to survive, so I at least want good character developments and challanges, which is something the new comics seem to lack, though: most of the new issues are standalone stories and with no good secondary characters "mortals" (that is, may be killed) there's no challange for them, no tension whatsoever. I'm not fluent in English, so I can't explain in detail.
I'm very disappointed by the new comics: Disney look at them as no more than business.
John Doom said:
This SW version is dated 1982, right? I can't believe the Death Star's walls are already grey instead of teal. What about ESB? Is the bacta tank's scene already different from its theatrical version? I don't get why they made so many changes.
SilverWook said:
Film to video transfers in the early days of home video aren't what they are now.
team_negative1 said:
Repost of comparison with the bluray:
==========================
Team Negative1
Well, I'd say LUCKILY they weren't what they are now :D
Akton said:
darklordoftech said:
Yoda isn't wearing the same garb, and if Anakin's also from Tatooine...
Yeah, I never saw that as "Jedi" garb either. To me, Anakin and Obi-Wan were just dressed like common Tatooine folk (as alluded to by Obi-Wan in SW: "He felt he should have stayed here and not gotten involved.")
I agree about the robe. We also know (http://web.archive.org/web/20141101101007/http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/thebeginning.html ) that George wanted the Jedi to wear a different samurai-like outfit (you can still see them wearing it in KOTOR)
Wasn't Obi-wan's quote referred to Owen, though?
Actually, I expected you to use this.
Wazzles said:
Ryan McAvoy said:
TV's Frink said:
I don't know how or why, but this thread has over 2k posts.
Fortunately there is no appetite for 4K posts and there never will be.
I can't really tell the difference between 2K and 4K posts from this distance anyway.
Who needs 2k posts threads, anyway (nevermind 4k!)? I bet a 1080 posts thread can be more than enough conclusive, don't you agree?
This SW version is dated 1982, right? I can't believe the Death Star's walls are already grey instead of teal. What about ESB? Is the bacta tank's scene already different from its theatrical version? I don't get why they made so many changes.
I still remeber that from my old VHS: Luke let himself fall, Vader's hand, silence... "...YEEAAARGGGH"! :D It really was the SE 97's "NOOoO moment" :D
Hal 9000 said:
Someone posted a cap of a single page from the upcoming Shattered Empire (not a spoiler) in which Old Ben informs a child Luke that he was a friend of his father's, flatly contradicting the dinner scene in ANH where Luke exclaims, "He knew my father?!"
Did he forget this? Probably all that "healthy" blue milk has made his brain rotten over the years (also explaining why he sees "ghosts") :D
Well, midi, maxi... I guess it makes sense (in those writers' twisted minds)... As long as they don't Force us to believe them, that is.
What's funny about Anakin is that Lucas himself didn't know what to do with him. Nevermind the whole lava/mutation thing, I think I remember he said in the ESB DVDs' commentary (I think they're from 1997, though) Anakin would've faced the Emperor in ROTS, but he would've lost both the battle and a great deal of his Force (explaining why he was forced to become his servant/apprentice, and probably Yoda's warning about the Emperor's powers).
I mean, if the guy himself is confused... :D
AntcuFaalb said:
Ugh, more resolution. I just want >8-bit color. :o(
How about 8-bit movies?
Here, I found that old article I mentioned: http://www.myuselessknowledge.com/swfa/Ret-Con.html
You're right, there was no official explanation for Vader's defeat. Frankie, please, don't send me one of your "love letters" :D
So much true. I read somewhere that, to justify Vader's death in "Splinter of the Mind's Eye", they recently officially said that it was just an image of himself created with the Dark Side. The same goes with Count Dooku's defeat in the videogame "The New Droid Army". Well, at least they tried to fix them :D
The PT is a big, giant plot hole itself :D
I know, Hellogreedo is a funny guy :D
Thanks for the link, but as I said, the problem it's just that the composites disturb the signal, the VCR works fine. Besides, I can't afford to buy a new one, so I'm ok with just fixing that problem. I just wish I knew how :\
edit: I read your edit, but it doesn't suggest how to fix my problem.
Anyway, somehow VHSs are cooler than 4k TVs :D
Danfun128 said:
Wouldn't the process go by better if you had a high end vhs player, a TBC, an old pentium 4 computer with a good ATI All-In-Wonder chip...
The more detail you can get from vhs images, the better, especially if that vhs is the only source of something ever.
I never heard of TBC but, after some research, I understand it corrects distortions. Unfortunately, that's not the worst it happens: when I'm converting a VHS to PC, sometimes reds become temporaly orange, or sound becomes too low. I found out that if I turn a bit the composite cables, I can fix/worsen the problem. My only conclusion is that my VCR still works great, and the needed SCART to composite passage is the real problem.
TV's Frink said:
Ronster said:
What you need to bear in mind is that there really is little or no point having a 32" 4k resolution screen.
It's only when you get to larger screen sizes such as 50" / 65" / 80" / 103" / Edge Blended projection / Large Video walls and LED walls that 4k resolution comes in to play and really does add a noticeable difference.I've just recently (as in the last few weeks) realized that I will be in the market for a new tv soon. Up until now, I hadn't even bothered thinking too much about 4k as a practical thing, but now I'm thinking....hmmmm.
So let's split the difference between the 32" and 50" sizes you mentioned above. Here's a Vizio 43" for $600.
http://www.amazon.com/VIZIO-M43-C1-43-Inch-Ultra-Smart/dp/B00T63YUTE/ref=sr_1_1?s=tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1432392483&sr=1-1
A comparable Vizio 42" 1080p set is only $150 less.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00JJNA10I/ref=psdc_6459737011_t1_B00T63YUTE
I'm not being my usual snarky self, but asking honestly - wouldn't it make sense at such a small price difference to go with the 4k set?
It wouldn't, because I doubt I'd see any difference. As I said, my TV is 48" and I watch it at a distance of about 2m. Seeing almost no difference between 720p vs 1080p picture, how am I supposed to appreciate 4k at the same size? Don't tell me I should buy a bigger TV, because I wouldn't: 48" it's the perfect match for my living room, thus making a bigger TV uncomfortable.
I couldn't have said it better myself.
Anyway, I still have a VCR myself, though I'm trying to convert every VHS I have (recorded) to DVD. The only problem is that I noticed all my conversions to DVD I did until now have audio and video problems, mostly because it's a PAL VCR to SCART, to SCART/composite, to composite, to grabber set :\
I wouldn't mind if I wasn't afraid of making my VHS worn out every time I play/convert them...
