logo Sign In

Mielr

User Group
Members
Join date
15-Jun-2006
Last activity
27-Dec-2024
Posts
2,805

Post History

Post
#245569
Topic
"BUT ANAMORPHIC ENHANCEMENT ALTERS THE MOVIES!!!"
Time
Originally posted by: Scruffy
It's not a matter of accepting or not accepting non-anamorphic DVDs, the fact is right now we don't have a choice!


No, Mielr. You always have a choice. But people tend to lose their brains when it comes to Star Wars and forget this fundamental truth of the human situation. A rational person would say, "This is the best choice," or, "This is not the best choice," or, "I cannot determine which choice is best." Irrational people deny even the possibility of choice*. To your credit, you seem to believe that the GOUT is the best choice, but you also make the mistake of saying it's the only choice. (That is, no choice at all.)
Of course there's a choice. My point is that we don't have a set of anamorphic and a set of non-anamorphic DVDs sitting on store shelves, so in that regard - we have no choice.

I choose to watch the highest quality version of the OOT available- which are the DVDs. Others may choose to watch inferior releases such as vhs, LD or bootlegs out of principle, and that's their choice.

Post
#245558
Topic
Waiting for Episode VII during the lean years (1984-1998)
Time
Ok, that's ONE review for SW and ONE for ESB. Show me the rest of the horrible reviews.

Here's an excerpt from the TIME Magazine review from 5/30/77:

"A universe of plenty—as audiences can discover beginning this week in Star Wars, a grand and glorious film that may well be the smash hit of 1977, and certainly is the best movie of the year so far. Star Wars is a combination of Flash Gordon, The Wizard of Oz, the Errol Flynn swashbucklers of the '30s and '40s and almost every western ever screened....."

Whole review here.
Post
#245552
Topic
Greedo subtitles outside the 16:9 frame
Time
I actually used the zoom function on my Sister's RCA DVD player last night, and the sub-titles were fully viewable on the screen. Instead of being in the black bar area, they're on the frame.

I think the solution to the problem is to use the zoom function on your DVD player, and not on your TV. If your DVD player doesn't have a zoom function---save up for a new one.
Post
#245549
Topic
"BUT ANAMORPHIC ENHANCEMENT ALTERS THE MOVIES!!!"
Time
It's not a matter of accepting or not accepting non-anamorphic DVDs, the fact is right now we don't have a choice! Would I rather have the DVDs anamorphic? HELL YES! But I'm sorry, if my only choice is to watch VHS, laserdisc, a bootleg fan edit -OR- a set of official, letterboxed DVDs made from the laserdisc masters, I'm going with the DVDs.

Why do I have a feeling that the majority of people who are critical of those who've purchased the DVDs, have not actually seen the DVDs for themselves? I think a lot of this is people "protesting too much" and trying to talk themselves out of buying the DVDs.
Post
#245360
Topic
Ideas for the inevitable Super-Mega-Special-Ultimate 2007 Boxset
Time
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
If they were optically printed onto the theatrical prints, how would they not be on the cels? Or are you saying that you don't happen to own any frames that contain scenes with subtitles?
They're on the cels, I just don't own any of the particular shots that were subtitled. I've bid on a few over the years because I thought it would be fun to have one, but haven't won any.

Post
#245311
Topic
Ideas for the inevitable Super-Mega-Special-Ultimate 2007 Boxset
Time
Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
And I'm sure in theatres, the subtitles weren't outside of the picture. But thanks for informing me.


The sub-titles were optically printed onto the theatrical prints, into the frames. If you look on eBay, you can sometimes find the 70mm cels with the subtitles on the film. It's usually the ROTJ ones that you find, from Jabba's palace. I have a large collection of the cels, but so far I don't own any with the subtitles.
Post
#245310
Topic
What is GOUT?
Time
Originally posted by: Darth_Evil
GOUT? It's something older people get that herts a lot.

And all these acronyms are crazy. OOT or OUT are the only ones that should be used. They make sense to everyone.

It's an inflammation of the joints, most often in the big toe.

I think it's silly as well - OUT or OOT are just fine.

Post
#244963
Topic
Ideas for the inevitable Super-Mega-Special-Ultimate 2007 Boxset
Time
This is what I would want (which we're not going to get):

discs 1 & 2) Star Wars - 1977 version, anamorphic. Extras: deleted scenes, alternate takes, etc.

discs 3 & 4) ESB - 1980 version, anamorphic. Extras: deleted scenes, alternate takes, etc.

discs 5 & 6) ROTJ - 1983 version, anamorphic. Extras: deleted scenes, alternate takes, etc.

2.0 sound is fine. I don't care about 5.1 sound. I also don't care about the Special Editions or Episodes 1-3.

Post
#244960
Topic
The Official Release VS. EditDroid
Time
Originally posted by: Cable-X1
No clue where the grain came from. I'll leave that explanation in the capable hands of the more technically literate members here. I know nothing of the subject.

I don't understand how it came out that way either if they were using a LD master....

Just don't listen to that crazy theory that the grain was intentionally added with CGI. That is wacky thinking...
There's quite a lot of discussion about the film grain issue here.

I'm of the opinion that the film grain is now more evident on the DVDs due to their increased resolution and clarity.
Post
#244952
Topic
Stormtrooper with 4 eyes ::( or Stormtrooper showing terrible IVTC/telecine artefacts
Time
Originally posted by: Knightmessenger
It's been said before that the "Faces" laserdisc set has less smearing and DVNR ghosting than Definitive Collection. So how could it be present on the master if the THX transfers were slightly different? Could it be that some noise reduction was applied on the fly during the telecine and then was further "corrected" in '93? And then when they went to the master for "One Last Time," they were smarter about how they used additional video fx?

I own both the DC set and the Faces LDs, and the picture looks identical to me. From what I've heard, the DVNR was done at the first step, so if that's true, it would be present on both releases. For some reason however, the smearing doesn't seem to be as bad on the DVDs.

Post
#244946
Topic
How I learned to stop worrying and love the 2004 dvd's
Time
Originally posted by: iamstillhiro1112
Originally posted by: Mielr
When the '97 SEs came out, I tried to convince myself to like them, but I just couldn't accept them no matter how hard I tried. I finally decided to stop trying. I consider the SEs to be experiments, curiosities, oddities, whatever- but they're not the real OT as far as I'm concerned, and they never will be.



That's your uncle talking. Learn about the force Mielr.

No, that's my inner Jedi talking. The force is with the OOT.
Post
#244698
Topic
Stormtrooper with 4 eyes ::( or Stormtrooper showing terrible IVTC/telecine artefacts
Time
Originally posted by: Knightmessenger
Does the 4 eyes occur on the special edition laserdisc. I believe by that part, the cg dewbacks and crap are off screen so a screenshot would not show any alterations.

Since the DVDs are made from the NTSC DC/Faces masters, whatever flaws you see on the DVDs will also be on the DC/Faces laserdiscs (and the Faces VHS, as well)- but the DVDs look a hell of a lot better.

The Special Edition LDs were made from totally different masters.