bkev

Oh, no, I saw the ROTJ ones - and even the most recent ones in the Star Wars thread look significantly better than this, even though they appear somewhat compressed too.  It's just kind of mind-boggling to me.  

I know I'm coming off as harsh, but I far preferred the way the blog was run to many of the seemingly spurious and bizarre facts/attitudes presented here.  Maybe you ought to select one member to post under the Team account?  Concerns about maintaining anonymity are completely valid, but the way things are going just serves to confuse the rest of us.

I'm, maybe a bit ironically, more okay with compressed videos on hosting services than still images.  Those I understand -- it's easier access for everyone involved, and supposedly different members of the Team have different quality clips available.  That's fine.

It's just the still images continually posted here, from day one that -1 posted, with this quality that baffle me.

Madman's R4 sets are taken from the same master as the original saga sets that came out in R1.  And the "banana brick" is from Manga Entertainment's R2 release of the DB season sets, which just started.  I would have pulled from R1 but this was the first comparison pic I could find, and really, they are essentially identical

Posting those pictures is a waste of time.  I might as well be looking at a 480 video on YouTube with that compression.

Not sure I like the look of that creature.  Others mentioned this before when the first on-set video with JJ came out, but remember how bad the original dewbacks looked on Tatooine?  Ironically I think the limited motion helps - I can't imagine those things moving much more and looking better.  JJ has the right frame of mind but I'm not sure he's a practical effects wizard.  He uses them when he can, but it takes balance and meticulous planning to make many of them convincing. Puppets like that, to me, just don't look right unless under special lighting conditions. 

I'm more than happy to be wrong, just expressing a healthy degree of skepticism.

I don't think it's a recent departure.  Have the feeling it's an older member.

I do admit, even if this is indeed a sock, I grow weary of the witch-hunt attitude around here.  Plus, wouldn't Moth3r have taken care of this one by now?

team_negative1 said:

 We are switching to Imgur, since that is still free hosting.

Team Negative1

 Glad you finally made this choice, been hoping you would for awhile now.

Wonder who that is... was hoping using the word "feck" would be a clue - not many people have used it here - but I'm still blanking.

All I've got for this thread is that it's 4am and I've def had enough. Disappointment, or relevant bump? You decide.

I was really ambivalent about the non-canonicity of the EU.

Then I remembered Kyle Katarn is EU. :(

here is a good example of the cropping from the opening.  Personally, it's really only noticeable because I've been told there's something missing; otherwise, the framing is tight but acceptable.

The real problem is the inconsistency of their masters.  Some parts of the series look great, and others have terrible oversaturation problems with reds out of control.  Even the saga sets had this problem.  Really, the only reason I consider the dragonbox better than these sets is the lack of zooming and having everything (as in, the multiple endings etc.)

Let me wiki that for you

disclaimer: totally trivial

I had a cronut today.  They're unironically good.  Now, if only they'd have them on campus more often!

Hmm... tough question.  I disagree with Warb's assessment.  For me, Casablanca is a film that requires prior understanding of filmmaking from the time.  It's too theatre in its acting and set-up for a modern group of high-school kids to enjoy unless they already have a love of the medium, the 40s, etc. (could be one or the other, could be all).

With only two hours, I'd consider going decade-by-decade with clips from famous movies/directors/etc.  Or, perhaps, by genre.  I'm afraid my knowledge of film extends mostly to cliché factoids or landmark achievements, otherwise I'd have a list of suggestions in that regard.

I hope you get the chance to do this!  Could be really fun.

edit: I will say I like your idea of comparing editing techniques.  It's definitely attention-grabbing and may be accessible beyond just your future film buffs in the class.

I hope you know what you're doing.  Have you experimented with your rewritten dialogue and the mouth flaps yourself?  I know most movies get heavy ADR, but that dubbing is done with the same lines as the on-set performance. Changing the script, when not done carefully, will look as bad as an old Chinese kung-fu flick with low-budget dubbing.

If you're serious about this, you may wish to try sites specifically designed with voice-acting in mind rather than here, such as the VAA or BTVA.  Professional projects sometimes succeed there.

He reacted rather arrogantly to a thread about a podcast he did a number of years back.  Long in the past, but a running joke in the moronathon nonetheless.

I have no comments one way or the other, just context.

hairy_hen said:

By throwing out all EU works (many of which are admittedly crap), they have tried to nullify the validity of the Thrawn trilogy, which is among the best Star Wars stories ever written

 I think this may be over thinking the move a little.  Personally, I think they made the distinction for the benefit of the casual fan - or consumer - rather than to undermine anything that's been previously released.

Some people prescribe to canon, others do not.  Personally, I never care one way or the other - but I won't stop people from having an idea of one if they want.

SilverWook said:

I wouldn't mind seeing Boba, as Robot Chicken made him seem cool again. ;)

So long as they don't get into how he survived, and have him be a "good" guy, so long as the New Republic keeps the money coming. There could be a lot of tension if Han had no choice but to work with him.

 Much as I dislike the idea of Boba coming back, this wouldn't be so bad.  I wouldn't even mind a rehash of the Holiday Special in the sense that they trust Boba in the wrong situations and almost pay the price... it would certainly make Boba a compelling character again.

Good point on the football fans, Warb.  I just tend to be exposed more to the fanatical devotion of Phillies fans than other teams.  My home team, the Dodgers, has plenty of fans -- but I never see them cry out for the firing of this person or that person after one disastrous game.

Also, your stadiums specifically have tunnels for the opposing teams that go straight from the locker rooms to the bus so nobody can accost them on the way out.  That definitely says something.

I'm not a sports fan in any way shape or form, so that may explain my difficulties understanding fanaticism.  Frankly, if you can get that invested in a sports team, good for you.  Just not my scene.

Sports fans baffle me.  Why are so many people, especially Phillies fans, so filled with hate and overly defensive?  This isn't directed only at Warb--I see it on my facebook news feed all the time.

I just don't get it.

For the record, I only agreed with the use of "rape" as the term to not appear contrary/pedantic.  Womanizing is, indeed, more correct.  I still find it disgusting, though.

I think it only reaches rape level of creepy very few times, but there's a clear focus on Kirk getting the girl because he's the hero.  Still enjoy TOS, for sure, but I'm more enthralled by DS9.

Warbler said:

bkev said:

Jetrell Fo said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Oh, and IMO, DS9 didn't fuck up Star Trek. If anything, it rectified some of the damage that TNG had done and restored some of the fun to the ST Universe that had been lacking in it since the TOS films had come to an end.

I agree with you 100% on this.  DS9 gave Star Trek it's teeth back.

 Also agreed.  DS9 took a few seasons to find its groove -- if Sisko's not bald, you're probably watching the wrong episode -- but man did it get good.  I especially liked the moral ambiguities of the Federation in this series.  showing that we're not perfect is always important in Trek, even if it's at the cost of some of the Utopian imagery.

 You mean the Utopian imagery that was Roddenberry original premise for Star Trek?  That humanity had improved and advanced? 

 In a sense, yes.  The original Trek epitomizes Space Age optimism as presented in pop culture and, I think, as a culture we have become too world wise - or cynical, take your pick - to accept that.  An ambiguous storyline is more compelling than B-Movie television.  DrCrow's thoughts on Garak point to why I enjoy DS9 as a whole and he said it well enough I don't need to.

In terms of TOS being a utopia, the only real problem I have with that universe is   the blatant sexism.  

Jetrell Fo said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Oh, and IMO, DS9 didn't fuck up Star Trek. If anything, it rectified some of the damage that TNG had done and restored some of the fun to the ST Universe that had been lacking in it since the TOS films had come to an end.

I agree with you 100% on this.  DS9 gave Star Trek it's teeth back.

 Also agreed.  DS9 took a few seasons to find its groove -- if Sisko's not bald, you're probably watching the wrong episode -- but man did it get good.  I especially liked the moral ambiguities of the Federation in this series.  showing that we're not perfect is always important in Trek, even if it's at the cost of some of the Utopian imagery.

Also, seriously.  Jeffrey Combs as Weyoun.  Andrew Robinson as Garak.  PERFECT casting and acting.  In fact, I think the whole cast is strong (but they are the standouts.)  Hell, even Terry Farrell learns to act after a few seasons; a part of me wonders if she really did get attached to Jadzia.

Ouch.  Mistake Edition?  Well, if it works for you, I suppose... I never had much luck with that one.

I stand by Windows XP but I'm comfortable on Windows 7 as well.  Skipped Vista after not enjoying the beta enough to warrant the upgrade.