In no way am I naive enough to believe that this will be anything other than the SE. If it's sanctioned by Disney, they'll have to be DCPs rather than just the Blus though. So the SEs in gleaming 4K. I'd pass anyway.
Don't worry, all of the projectionists lost those jobs to digital, so that's no longer an issue. I think that's a huge loss, but hey, I'm stuck int the past. I think if you go through the previous VHS, laserdisc, DVD, TV, and 35mm releases, you'll find that if the color doesn't look the same, it's a similar baseline, which looks completely different from the Blu release. I'm not saying that you can't prefer the newly revised look, but that teal and orange fad is relatively new and I'm fairly certain it wasn't the look which the film had in any incarnation before, if it was even possible to achieve with the technology of the time. I just don't see any way around the fact that this is a deliberate change. You could of course argue that it's a positive or insignificant change, but given how recent the fad of this coloring is and how many sites have reported on it, IMO it is a deliberate change. How much in changes the movie is obviously going be up to each individual viewer. Over the years the fans may have experienced a different color pallet, but this one is different enough that people notice it. But hey, I like 35mm, so to each his own ;).
imperialscum said:
Mike O said:
I actually love that blue/green tone. That was the only good thing about 2004 release of OT.
Like it or dislike it, it's not how the film looked for 25 years prior to its Blu-ray release, and that, IMO, is not OK.
In digital form the colours of course do not degrade over time.
On the other hand, film stock have never looked the same over 25 years since it is constantly changing (degrading) the colours. At the time they scanned for DVD the colours were different from ones that were originally captured on set. Not to mention if they scanned a copy of the original footage. And even further, films stock could not have captured the exact colours that were percieved by the director's eyes at the time he setup the scene. So if the director thought that were not the colours he perceived at the time, I don't see why not try to reproduce them the way he wanted them.
Yes, and the type of film stock upon which Aliens was shot was difficult and discontinued thereafter. That's not the point. Did the film look exactly the same over the course of those 25 years? Maybe not. But over the course of time, it still had a very specific color palette which millions of fans came to know the film looked like. For the Blu release, Cameron specifically changed the look of the film to a way which it hadn't looked before. It's also a color-timing issue he applied to T1, and the teal and orange is currently trendy, so I question his "originally" comment anyway. It's NOT the way either of those films looked for decades. Cameron can pull a Lucas and say that's how he always intended them to look, but he's still changing something, and revising something, from how it's been known to look for decades. Obviously, how acceptable that is going to very from viewer to viewer, but it is significantly different. Maybe it is what he originally intended, but it's not film I came to love. Everyone looks like they have psoriasis on the new release. That screenshot alone clearly shows that it's completely different from the way it used to look. Unless of course Prometheus II: Deus Ex Machina reveals that the xenomorphs carried a pathogen or something.
JayArgonaut said:
SilverWook said:
Wait a minute. The whole raison d'etre for the 1997 versions, was George felt the OOT were unfinished works, because he didn't have enough time and money originally to achieve his "vision".
So, he essentially leaves them unfinished again, on purpose this time?
Good point. Lucas' rationale just doesn't hold up to serious scrutiny. It's the stuff of satire that would make Orwell, Kafka and Heller proud.
Here's an infamous quote from 2004 by LFL's VP of marketing, Jim Ward in response to the demand for the original versions:
We love our fans but this is about art and filmmaking.
As a point of integrity, an organization that loves their fans and is truly concerned "about art and filmmaking" wouldn't deliberately release an unfinished product with the founder claiming during interviews that the release fulfills their "vision." (On a side note, a company that loves their fans and is committed to the ideals of art and filmmaking wouldn't suppress the availability of their films, nor would they release vandalized versions in the first place.)
As with much of digital revisionism Lucas practices, his so-called "original vision" has changed at least 3 times. Moreover, if that was his "original vision," he shouldn't have released the GOUT. Then he'd have at least stuck to his guns even if I'd have disliked him and disagreed with him. Now he's pretty much contradicted everything he himself has said.
Thanks for that comparison, my HDTV recording appears to have been sourced from the same "colour corrected" master as the Blu-Ray. I'll stick to watching my DVD instead.
I'm sure that if a DCP is struck, Cameron will strike it with that. It's probably the source for it now. He's pretty much erased the original color timing the same way Lucas has his original works, and I can't see demand for it being very big either, so it's not like another release is likely, especially given that the release is apparently exemplary in every other way :(. Cameron did actually apply some of that on the SE DVD version, apparently, but not to as extreme a degree. I'd really love to get rid of my Legacy and Quadrilogy (That's not a word) boxed sets and save some space, but Cameron has made me hang on to them. Shame the DVD will naturally be so inferior. Apparently Scott did it to the first film to a lesser degree too. If you've seen it in 35mm, I envy you. Add to that the fact the physical media market is on its knees, and a new release doesn't look likely much of anywhere in the future.
Filmmakers, directors etc are entitled to make whatever revisions they like to their work (and in the case people such as Lucas, their franchises), regardless of whether those revisions are ill advised and come across as vandalism. As a consumer, I'm also entitled to object to what I see as bad choices that ruin my enjoyment of the product and vote accordingly with my cash.
All arguments about film history aside, they certainly have no moral or legal obligation to release it. But I wish they would. But while you and I may vote with our money, the average person doesn't care. And on the off-chance that the OOT comes out remastered, I can't see Aliens and Terminator, which have already been remastered, getting their color-timing fixed back to the way it was before. The average person doesn't care, and with Cameron currently holding the top two box office hits in history, he probably doesn't much care what the fanbase thinks anyway.
Frankly, there should be a law making it illegal to release a special edition/director's cut/etc. of a film without releasing the original cut alongside it.
The Lucas example is the most extreme one, but the stuff with Michael Mann, James Cameron, Raimi, etc. is much subtler and much less likely to be noticed by the less discerning, and therefore less likely to be fixed. And that's not even counting all of the releases which omit the mono-The Evil Dead, Evil Dead 2, An American Werewolf in London, Sergio Leone films, and God knows how many Hong Kong movies to name just a few. Being and HK fan is almost as frustrating as being an OOT fan. Even most of the damn Tai Seng VHS tapes are hard to find.
Mike O
God, I wish I could fix my name :p.
Regarding FotR, you're probably right. The problem with that new transfer isn't so much the coloration as the lack of contrast in the image. A big piece of evidence is the dissolve to white when Arwen saves Frodo: on all other transfers it's bright white whereas it's just a pale shade of green on the extended blu-ray. It's the same problem with any other scenes that should exhibit "peak white," such as the letters in the title shot and end credits. When you consider that a recall would've involved exchanging not just one, but two whole discs, you can see why everyone involved would've agreed to just keep saying "it looks exactly as we intended." Pretty frustrating when - aside from that one significant problem that affects the entire transfer - it's actually a pretty big step up from the theatrical blu-ray in terms of detail. All previous transfers of FotR were telecines of filmouts. The extended blu-ray was the first time they made a transfer directly from the DI files.
It's especially odd when you consider how digitally obsessed Jackson usually is. I think you're right though-it was a mastering fuckup that they'd simply rather not spend the time and money fixing. I'm hoping there'll be a new transfer in the inevitable six-film Mega-Middle-Earth boxed set which I'm holding out on buying the movie for (And man alive, is it a long wait!), but I'm not holding my breath.
The new transfer of Raiders is really more of a head-scratcher than a frustration. When you consider that they'd already done newer transfers of the three movies in 2008 (it's those transfers that were used for the Temple and Crusade blu-rays, in fact) and even struck new 35mm prints from them, you wonder what decisions led to them giving Raiders a radically different color-timing in 2012 from how they made it look in 2008.
That one mystifies me. It thought it might be a mastering mistake too, but given how obsessive Spielberg is about the visual look of his films (And the I recently attended a film club at a local multiplex and they projected the Blu of Jaws on a big-ass screen, and it was stunning.), I'm not sure. Why he'd swear off revisionism and then do a big change like that, I don't know. And the other discs in the boxed set don't have UPCs to sell individually either :p.
I actually love that blue/green tone. That was the only good thing about 2004 release of OT.
Like it or dislike it, it's not how the film looked for 25 years prior to its Blu-ray release, and that, IMO, is not OK.
That appears to tie in with reports by The Digital Bits soon after the 2004 DVD's were released that industry insiders had informed them that Lucas was preparing even further changes for subsequent versions.
So basically, the 2004 release was a just a placeholder to make OOT fans shut up?
And just when I though Lucas couldn't sink any lower...
I think it rules out the possibility of Disney releasing the OOT even further too.
Damn him in the ass!
How do you damn someone in the ass?
Sorry about the haphazard setup, these forums are weird and are even giving me trouble copying and pasting. And I think that we'll see all of the above fixed before we see new forums here ;).
Fang Zei said:
generalfrevious said:
Mike O said:
Fang Zei said:
Yeah, I hate that directors can't leave well enough alone and have to digitally erase stuff from their older films. It becomes frustrating when a movie like Evil Dead gets a beautiful restoration for its blu-ray debut but is then altered from its original version because the director wanted to "fix" things.
By the way, did Cameron actually make alterations to T1? I remember reading about one or two shots that people had spotted, but I never saw screenshot comparisons. It's probably a given that he's made "fixes" to True Lies and The Abyss, which are hitting blu-ray later this year. I should probably brace myself for when the eventual remaster of T2 suffers a similar fate.
What alterations were made The Evil Dead Blu-Ray? I know it didn't include the mono. The Terminator didn't include the original mono track, and much like he did with Aliens, Cameron has changed the color timing completely to that teal and orange that he wants it to swim in. I think the sadder part is that not only will T2, The Abyss, and True Lies almost certainly suffer the same fate (I still hate myself for supporting Wal-Mart and buying the HDX True Lies from Vudu, but it was the only place to get it.), and no one will give a damn. No one cares about the kind of revisionism practiced by Lucas, there certainly isn't anyone who gives a fuck about the recoloring on those films :(. The dark side of digital, change is easier than ever, and why? Because they can. And after Cameron spoke out against what Lucas did, too. FML.
Those were minor technical points, aren't they? Cameron really hasn't done what Lucas has (right?), changing whole scenes around where another character shoots first, people screaming nooooo when they didn't in an earlier version, editing out original actors and replacing them with actors who weren't alive when the original film was out, and shoehorning CGI from the late 90s into a film from the 70s. Then deride the real films as rough drafts and letting them disintegrate and be lost forever. This is a whole new level than just color correcting.
Raimi had some of the glaring bloopers - bloopers that kinda give the movie part of its charm - digitally erased. It's even more frustrating because they made brand new masters of both the 1.37:1 and 1.85:1 versions to include on the Blu-ray (just as the old DVD had both framings), and they both have the same digital revisions in them.
Cameron didn't quite do the same thing as Lucas with his newer transfers of Aliens and Titanic, no, but then again I think Cameron puts more emphasis on the original version's edit being what makes it the "original version" than any digital revisions that may be found within otherwise identical edits, and he "fixed" a whole bunch of things in Titanic for its most recent release. Funny enough, the theatrical cut of Aliens on the Blu-ray can't technically be called that from an editing standpoint either: Cameron corrected the order of four shots where Ripley picks up a flamethrower, puts down a machine gun, picks up a machine gun, puts down a flamethrower. Although I guess I should simply be thankful that the only thing he erased in Aliens (AFAIK) is Lance Henricksen's torso sticking out of the ground in a shot during the final action scene. It's almost like the snake pit reflection to Aliens' RotLA.
Similarly, Cameron seems to have left T1 alone for the most part, although I don't see why it was so much trouble to include the mono track. He's given it that new color timing, yeah, but those kind of things don't tend to bother me as much. I'll admit the most recent transfer of Raiders didn't look right to my eyes when the screenshots popped up online, but then again there seems to be disagreement as to just how the movie looked in '81. The new transfers of Fellowship of the Ring and AotC (Hey, back on topic!) also look weird to me, and I suspect it has something to do with digging up movies that were some of the earliest DI's after almost a decade.
Plus both The Evil Dead and Evil Dead 2 both omit the original mono tracks. And I don't for the life of me understand why the hell that's so hard. Wouldn't it be more work to actually create a remix? An American Werewolf in London omits it too, and that's nothing comparted to the hideous downmixes on the Sergio Leone releases or the countless one Fortune Star tried to pass off on their Hong Kong discs. As for T1, Cameron certainly hasn't left it alone, like Aliens, the Blu-ray transfer is now awash in teal. I thought that when it was originally scanned, such revisions didn't apply? IF that's the case, that's even worse. Cameron may not have done quite the same thing as Lucas, but the principle is entirely the same, altering the way something was originally both made and shown for many years.
Apparently Cameron thinks those are the colors he always intended to use in 1986. And between the market being on its knees, the franchise being dead, and the fact that it was done by Cameron himself, I don't see it being fixed now or ever. And I can't imagine many 35mm prints of it still kick around. Subtle revisions like the snake pit reflection in Raiders do bug me, but I also have to accept that to a normal, well-adjusted person who gets laid once in a while, but it bothers me all the same the same way it does on the Evil Dead disc, and it's a slippery slope to think what they'll go changing next. In other cases, like the coloring issues on The Fellowship of the Ring or Raiders of the Lost Ark Blu-rays, I do sometimes wonder if it's not a case of revisionism, but of simple fuckups on the mastering end.
Tobar said:
Yeah I never understood the whole THX-1138 is lost thing. I saw the original a number of years ago and it certainly wasn't on VHS or laserdisc.
Where was it? I have a VHS version I recorded off of TCM (haven't watched it), maybe they'd show it again in HD?
SilverWook said:
Mike O said:
DominicCobb said:
THX 1138 is definitely not lost. I watched the original on-demand a couple years ago. I believe it was standard definition, but still.
Maybe, but it's never been released on any home video format besides VHS and LD, I certainly don't see enough interest in the original version to get a it a Blu-ray release. It's like the recolorings of Aliens or Terminator, 99% of the population probably don't care enough for it to matter.
If there's a decent SD master Warner has been sitting on of the original, it wouldn't cost them much to put out via their made on demand Archive label. If they can skirt around George that is...
That's still only SD, but yeah, you're right. I wonder what kind of sway he he holds as regard that movie? Granted, the market for the original version of that is so small that Warned probably wouldn't care anyway.
SilverWook said:
DominicCobb said:
THX 1138 is definitely not lost. I watched the original on-demand a couple years ago. I believe it was standard definition, but still.
You think you could track that down? Even an SD version might be better than the dodgy Laserdisc master that's caused the preservation project more than a few headaches.
Like I said, TCM showed it, maybe TCM HD would show it in 1080i or 720p. Not exactly like having the 35mm print there, but still...
Digital is ever the double-edge sword. God, we live in an amazing time...
DominicCobb said:
THX 1138 is definitely not lost. I watched the original on-demand a couple years ago. I believe it was standard definition, but still.
Maybe, but it's never been released on any home video format besides VHS and LD, I certainly don't see enough interest in the original version to get a it a Blu-ray release. It's like the recolorings of Aliens or Terminator, 99% of the population probably don't care enough for it to matter.
Ryan McAvoy said:
JayArgonaut sBoba Fett isn't gay??!?! That's a new one to me.
I thought that's why his father Jango went down the cloning option, instead of just getting a lady pregnant. And since Jango was clearly gay, then all his clones would be too. Boba Fett and the Stromtroopers ;-)
They call me Boba Fett, you wanna mess with me? I'll put my a balls in your mouth like Boba tea!
Fang Zei said:
Yeah, I hate that directors can't leave well enough alone and have to digitally erase stuff from their older films. It becomes frustrating when a movie like Evil Dead gets a beautiful restoration for its blu-ray debut but is then altered from its original version because the director wanted to "fix" things.
By the way, did Cameron actually make alterations to T1? I remember reading about one or two shots that people had spotted, but I never saw screenshot comparisons. It's probably a given that he's made "fixes" to True Lies and The Abyss, which are hitting blu-ray later this year. I should probably brace myself for when the eventual remaster of T2 suffers a similar fate.
What alterations were made The Evil Dead Blu-Ray? I know it didn't include the mono. The Terminator didn't include the original mono track, and much like he did with Aliens, Cameron has changed the color timing completely to that teal and orange that he wants it to swim in. I think the sadder part is that not only will T2, The Abyss, and True Lies almost certainly suffer the same fate (I still hate myself for supporting Wal-Mart and buying the HDX True Lies from Vudu, but it was the only place to get it.), and no one will give a damn. No one cares about the kind of revisionism practiced by Lucas, there certainly isn't anyone who gives a fuck about the recoloring on those films :(. The dark side of digital, change is easier than ever, and why? Because they can. And after Cameron spoke out against what Lucas did, too. FML.
Lucas is of course the biggest offender, but I think that the fact is that digital makes it a lot easier to make alterations and it leads many directors to do it "because they can." I only recently discovered Cameron's hideous revisions to ALIENS and T1, Michael Mann's revisions to his Criterion releases, what Walter Hill did to THE WARRIORS, etc. And that's not even counting THX 1138, which is never getting fixed. I think that digital has made many filmmakers to engage in revisionism just because it's easier.
Does no one ever use this forum, the posts seem to be very few and far between? I'd try somewhere else, but I don't know where, because of the legal gray area, I don't think I could ask at DVD Talk, CNET, Video Help, AVS, etc.
I don't want to violate any laws, but asking AT&T or CNET has simply gotten me "You can't," and most forums would probably view it as a violation of the rules, so I'll ask here.
I'd have like to get the Oppo BD player, a Panasonic plasma (an option now closed, maybe I could get a Samsung, but good lord are they expensive), and whatever badass speakers and receivers are available. I was thinking Bose, by I'm told they aren't worth the asking price. Apparently there other more worthy choices. This is all idle speculation though because of the money issues. My life is such a mess, but this thread is about Blu-Ray, not therapy :p.
Wound up getting a Westinghouse HDTV on sale at Best Buy and a Sony BDP S 3100 modded on eBay for the region-free player. Nothing impressive, but it does the job. I got the Disney World of Wonder disc to calibrate, and I'm apparently such a Luddite that I can't even use that, my eyes aren't quite sharp enough to discern many of the differences. And I wanted an Oppo and Panasonic.
Thank you. Now, onto the question...
Damn iPhone.
Didn't know that section if the forum even existed, can a mod move this thread?
I love TCM precisely because they have a habit of showing stuff you can't get on DVD, and in HD too. Unfortunately, my equipment is next to nil in the electronics department, and there's probably so much DRM on the damn stuff that getting it off would be difficult. Though oddly, I do seem to be able to record it to my VCR downstairs. In any event, is there any way I can get the stuff off without a DVD/Blu-Ray recorder? I do have an external hard drive with a significant amount of space, but unfortunately only a PC, not a laptop. Could lug the DVR in the living room or something, but anyway, in spite of two USB ports, I'm damn sure not naive enough to believe that I can plug a USB stick on and just put it on there. I don't want to break the law or have the FBI knocking on my door, if the stuff was on DVD, I'd certainly buy it. I'm assuming there's no way of doing this without spending money on some kind of equipment? Fan editors? Any advice?
I have a ton of these which came out in the 90s. I'm seriously considering just selling them on eBay or someting.
It seems to have deleted all of my podcasts of the Treatment AGAIN. Is my computer on cocaine or something? Why does it have a mind of its own?
TV's Frink said:
Mike O said:
Well if the forum software here works that way, maybe one of the mods can merge all of the threads.
I can assure you that ain't gonna happen.
I'm assuming that the forum software doesn't allow for it, even if the mods did actually care?
I'm waiting for the inevitable mega-box with all six movies and 20+ discs. Maybe they'll unfuck the color grading problem when that happens, though theafter will probably happen around the same time as Blus of Leone's Dollars trilogy come out with the mono tracks like they should, ie never.
Well if the forum software here works that way, maybe one of the mods can merge all of the threads. Anyway, my question?
FanFiltration said:
Mike O said:
Sorry. The search function here is not the most functional among the various forums I visit.
There's a Search Function on this forum?
Such as it was, yes, although I don't know if it's there anymore, but it's usefulness was rather limited anyway. You really can't do what you'd do on normal forums-page through user's posts, etc.-like you can here. I like the community here, but in all honesty, the forums themselves are rather frustrating from time to time. Anyway, can I do what I'm asking with the podcasts?
Sorry. The search function here is not the most functional among the various forums I visit.
I regularly download two podcasts-Kermode and Mayo film review show and The Treatment with Elvis Mitchell. I'm currently backed up only 64 episodes :p. Several times now, for no reason I can discern, my computer deleted all of the episodes of the Treatment and even some K&M. I was able to find some of the latter as buried files, but never the former. I've tried downloading backlog episodes from iCloud, but they only go so far. Is there any place where I could find other older episodes? Even someplace like a torrent site or something? As these are offered free anyway, I would have no compunctions about downloading them in such a fashion. Even if I did, would I be able to organize them properly to display with the rest chronologically?