Windexed

Wexter said:

I actually thought the Force projection thing was alright. That was I think the only time this movie ventured somewhat successfully out of its own comfort zone. Sure, it’s not the most outrageous thing you could think of, but at least it’s something we haven’t seen in a Star Wars movie before.

Except every single person in the galaxy for the past 8 films, including extremely powerful Jedi and Sith characters, all had to use the holographic projection communication system. But what did the know anyway when we have force FaceTime.

For some reason the scene at the end with the kids and the broom reminded me of that Michael Jackson “Moonwalker” movie/video.

Well, tlj definitely was more intense and emotionally involving then I thought it would be. I’ve been thinking about it more or less for 24 straight hours, which is very unusual for me. After analyzing my feelings, I’m coming to the realization that it sucks. I admire the pizazz, but breaking free of in-universe rules is lazy and sets a bad precedent. Add to that the amount of stupid crap in it, and I’m gonna have to go ahead and throw TLJ in the bottom of the bin along with AOTC.

Funny thing is, I haven’t given up on future SW films. I kind of use a take on that Michael Fassbender line from “300”. “With all the world’s men and resources (Disney) hopefully somebody at some point will give us a good goddam Star Wars movie”.

Silly question, but does anyone have an opinion on whether I could take my 6-year old to this. He’s not really allowed to view anything violent however I make an exception for Star Wars. I don’t want him to see Tfa as I find Kylo’s murder scenes a little too dark. This didn’t seem nearly as violent. Is it just me?

While I’m not sure the result is actually good, I have to give Johnson and/or Disney some respect for try something new and expanding the conventions. The film is obviously layered (much more so then the other recent films) but the theme I came away with most is the “out with the old, in with the new”. Kylo says it, Yoda says it, and even Luke accepts it by the end. Lucas created this universe with a very formal set of rules, and plots adhered to these rules through his six films (as did RO). I wonder if this message of breaking the old ground rules and setting new ones (or abandoning conventions all together) is intentional on Disney’s part as a way of moving forward in order to expand the Star Wars brand to new places?

nickyd47 said:

Also, does it matter if Kathleen believes in George’s vision when the house of mouse can override that and be like “nope, we like money, put out the OOT, we worked out a deal with FOX”

They let Disney have their way with EP7 so…

This. George was his own boss. If he wanted to make a sw film made of nothing but of cgi potatoes, he could. Kathleen Kennedy is not her own boss. She is a figurehead/manager who answers to stock holders and a corporate board (see: syndicate).

When Disney bought Lucasfilm, they bought EVERYTHING. There’s no contract that says they can’t release the out. For $4 billion, they don’t owe George anything. Kk might have professional and personal respect for George, but also has superiors to appease. Superiors who micromanage every decision to the tiniest detail in order maximize short and long term profits.

Disney can and will release the out, but it will be solely when they feel it will get the biggest bang; not when the fans want it, not to comemmerate some date,etc.

A quick thought popped into my head while staring off into space at work. I would in no way be offended if JJ was to digitally manipulate Carrie Fisher's voice in TFA.

In my opinion, dvd sales were somewhat of a fad, that being somewhat of a misnomer. Before dvd, watching movies wasn't as easy as everyone thinks. Only major releases on vhs were affordable, and prices of vcr's weren't the same as the cheap dvd players that followed. Ten years ago, cheap dvd players cost $30 dollars. Walmart had (and still does) bargain bins of $5 dvds. People bought them by the buttload, because it was cheap. Shit, half the dvds purchased by your average consumer were probably watched once then put on the shelf. People aren't going to buy crappy movies twice when the first time they bought it, it was $5 and now its $15 on blu-ray, but they might pick up Gravity or something similiar that they'll watch more often. I still see a market for 4K physical media, but it;s not going to be like dvd, as it should be.

I have a 4k television, but something still troubles me. For instance, hypothetically, say there's a breakthrough in manufacturing costs for 4K televisions, and they can be bought for a relatively reasonable cost. Also, assume at the same time entertainment  companies have lots of material available for streaming and/or download. How are you and your neighbors all going to be able to stream huge ultra HD files at the same time when physical bandwith infrastructure is limited? This isn't meant for any person in particular, just a general question.

Quick question. I recently watched the Blu-ray for first time and only briefly dabbled in the 97 SE and 2004 DVDs. In ANH, when 3PO and R2 land on tatooine and are wandering around in the desert, it always seemed as though the sky was partly cloudy to overcast in most shots. Now the sky is blue. My question is, is the blue sky how it was originally shot, even if it was digitally enhanced? Is the blurry sky a result of fading filmstock/vhs/laserdisc/ect? Basically what I want to know is that, hypothetically, if old versions of the films were scanned/cleaned/adjusted and whatnot, would the sky be blue or more grey and/or overcast?

moviefreakedmind said:

Windexed said:

No, this was before it became communist China. But me trying to start a discussion, albeit tongue-in-cheek, quickly spiraled downward.

 As someone who didn't make it out of the early 1990's until a few years ago (hell, I still have/use a VCR), I have no knowledge of what TFN was like before about 2012. Was it once a website worth visiting? When did it become a dystopian 1984 type place?

 It was always pretty bad, it's just that the "group think" got worse over time. I'm sure the other guys here can give you a better timeline. Again, this was about 13 years ago, but I made a mild bathroom humor thread in the off topic forum. It was deleted and I was told that there was no room for "potty humor" or whathaveyou on the boards since it was geared towards being family friendly. My argument that there's poop jokes IN THE F'ING MOVIES fell on deaf ears.

No, this was before it became communist China. But me trying to start a discussion, albeit tongue-in-cheek, quickly spiraled downward.

The internet excitement/chatter/speculation/ect for Force Awakens made me have a flash back to before AOTC came out. I was on TF.N, somewhat trolling I suppose, when I started a thread about whether or not George Lucas was going to let Samuel L. Jackson say "motherf*cker" in the movie, since that was pretty much what he was known for saying in virtually every film. I guess you can assume what the response was.

This is the biggest conundrum for me when it comes to the idea of releasing an OUT on blu-ray. Everyone has a different opinion of what it should be, and that's just in the die-hard  fan sector. Add that to the casual fan and or viewer, along with the people at Disney. In each if these sectors, you have different levels of interest when it comes to the details (matte lines, colors, sound mix, ect)  in each version as well as differing knowledge of what details encompass a specific version of OUT. Basically what I'm saying is there is no consensus, which is a potential problem.

You guys know way more than I do, but wasn't the OT filmed with a still camera most of time with wide shots? I know JJ is using more practical sets/effects and shooting on 35mm, but what good is it if its all done in a slick, modern camerawork style? I'm willing to bet this thing will be over-edited to hell. Shoot, we might even get some shaky-cam.

I watched the 2014 Godzilla yet again. This movie perplexes me. While calling it "terrible" would be inaccurate and illogical, for some reason I just really dislike the film. Other than the effects, I find everything else completely lackluster. While I'm not exactly a Godzilla fan, is there something I'm missing?

My take was always that Palp talking about Plagueis to Anakin was just a red herring. Kind of like a little kick-in-the-ass for Anakin to hurray up and join the darkside.

TMBTM said:

I'm not excited in the sens that I do not try to catch all the spoilers like when Episode 1 was made. But I have  hopes that it will be good. And I'll probably see it hopening night (or just after) just because I prefer watching it with a bunch of fans rather than in a room full of people texting on their Iphone or talking about something else during the screening...

I'm the exact opposite. I had no interest in Ep III, but went to opening night anyway just to keep the ol' streak going. With the excitement and energy in the theater, I kind of fell victim to the "group think" thing, and left thinking "hey, that wasn't that bad."  Upon later, more objective viewings, I was "yeah, it's pretty lousy."

I do like the point that was brought up about how the ST is viewed as a part of the SW film franchise versus just a new top-tier sci-fi/fantasy IP. I'm not sure at this point whether the SW moniker is more or less influential on my anticipation. What other original properties coming out in the future are interesting? While I'm definitely a jaded SW fan, there's not much else to look forward to that isn't some sort of sequel or adaptation. Channing Tatum with dog ears? No thanks.

I still kind of wish GL was involved in some minor capacity (perhaps extremely minor). Kind of like how Arnold Palmer makes golf courses. He might tell them to put a tree here and a bunker there, but otherwise he just shows up for the opening ceremony, smiles, cuts the ribbon, takes a piss in the bushes, and leaves. The architects, engineers, and other skilled people do 99% of everything, which is how it should be.

I'm excited. However, and this may sound silly, I feel kind of weird about the fact that Lucas isn't involved. While I believe any creative talent he may have had disappeared a long time ago, someone else taking over everything seems kind of...inauthentic. Kind of like if your Mom remarried while your asshole dad is doing life in prison. The new guy might be nice, but he's not your Dad

No. It's mean and nasty...and slightly funny.

Live. Die. Repeat. and/or Edge of Tomorrow

I can't say I was pleasantly surprised because everything I heard about it was rather positive. I also can't necessarily call it original because it seemed a mishmash of things that have been done before (Ground Hogs Day, Elysium, Saving Private Ryan, Starship Troopers, Battle: Los Angeles, Matrix, ect). All that being said, I found it to be well made and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Oh, and Bill Paxton's performance almost brought a tear to my eye.

Someone "upperdecked" a toilet at work. )=

canofhumdingers said:

As for 4k TV's, unless you're buying a REALLY REALLY REALLY huge tv, you probably don't have the eyesight to actually take advantage of the difference. And by huge, I mean so big it won't fit in most people's houses. Like, movie theater sized screen big.

I saw a demo of one at Bestbuy that was around 65". It was obviously playing some sort of demo reel that included a montage of scenes from the various Transformers movies. The image quality was unreal, far beyond any 1080p image I've seen. Then again I have no interest in watching any of the Transformers movies in any form.

Warbler said:

ElectricTriangle said:

There is no official disk based media for 4k yet. The "mastered in 4k" refers to how they were scanned; they are 1080p disks. I  think Netflix offers a tiny bit of content in 4k, but there is no way you can get that on a"somewhat crappy internet connection."

Just don't get a 4k TV.

 well what is the difference between a blu ray that is "mastered in 4k" and on that isn't?  There many blu-rays in which the movie was transfered to 4k or originally filmed in 4k like the last 2 episodes of the PT and put on blu ray that aren't labeled "mastered in 4k.  What's the difference?

 Exactly my question. For instance, Battle: Los Angeles (which is a relatively new movie) was, I'm guessing, shot in 4K, has a regular blu-ray, and a new edition seemingly specifically marketed for 4K televisions.

I started the thread here because I'm curious about the format, not to join the convo in the "official" 4K thread about whether the GOUT is shitty, kinda shitty, diarrhea-with-carrots shitty, ect. I just wanted some information, and if a discussion actually started, then so be it.