bkev

I saw a digital projection that wasn't imax and was mostly satisfied with the color. Wish it was a 35mm; this theater seems to switch off between digital and film depending on the movie for some reason (TDKR was film, but Amazing Spider-Man was digital 3D.) While it did seem a bit warm, I generally trust Spielberg's decisions and will give him the benefit of the doubt; hopefully Robert Harris' few words will confirm my beliefs that this is pretty solid. I was perturbed by the occasional moments of out-of-focusness, though. They appeared right around where other people reported them, ie in the opening sequence. Here's hoping that doesn't transfer to the BD...

Normally, a CG kid's movie from Sony like Hotel Transylvania would have me heading for the hills... but then I found out Genndy Tartakovsky (Dexter's Lab, Two Stupid Dogs, Samurai Jack etc.) was one of the directors. And that his primary influence in the style for the movie was - rather than imitating real life - classic Tex Avery shorts from the first half of the 20th Century.

I am now unironically excited for this movie and hope it's as good as that makes it sound.

I'm hoping this ends up on a filesharing service soon... while torrents would normally be my go-to, my college is actually smart enough to block P2P networking and I have yet to figure out how to get around it. I am eagerly awaiting the chance to see this!

I like seeing the experiments you guys have done with the test reel. Thanks for sharing! If you can do that much with this I can only wonder what the real deal's gonna look like.

Upping my font size seems to fix that. However, I really liked the font size I was using (don't ask me what, I just cycle through with - and +.) It's disappointing, because this is only a recent issue I've had.

This has been happening more recently to me. I'm on a Mac using Google Chrome, though that should probably be obvious. Any ideas? Again, it's only a more recent development. I'm wondering if it's just me.

I will say that we could very well be wrong about this if only because of this shot:

The one on the left, which is in fact from the blu, matches my recollection of the 35mm print I saw 2-3 years ago better than the DVD cap. Maybe the rest of it is just down to aesthetic tastes? I don't know. I think I'm going to retract my statement about not buying it though.

I'll wait until I see this restoration on the big screen this weekend to make a verdict on if it's worth a purchase. If the colors turn out that unappealing, I can probably adjust my TV to my liking.

Kenkraly said:

Paul_Scott I think your over re acting about the new transfers way too much and the set is not even out yet. Like I said before directors change the look of their catalog films when they come out on Blu-Ray it's nothing new get use to it.

kenkraly? IN MY HOME THEATER FORUM? Madness!

Darth Mallwalker said:

bkev said:

Picture is a stock photo

Paranoid much ?
I don't remember the license plate showing in your original pic. Or was it?

I'm unimpressed by that joke.

Hyundai Santa Fe 2003. It was my mother's car, but I've taken it down to San Diego for college. She drives very smooth for a vehicle of her size and I love her so.

Picture is a stock photo, mine probably has a few more scratches or dents here and there.

^I think when resizing it might be a good idea to take into account the fact that the framing is slightly different. I don't remember what thread it's in, but -1 has well documented that there is more information all around the way they're capturing the print.

I went to buy a Retron today. Unfortunately, it was out of stock. Hoping I can snag one at my local game store before I head back to school.

I have to admit though that - to be fair - only a few of them actually look really cool. Spy Who Loved Me is pretty awful.

It was moved back a page on the "My Two Cents" archive. Check them out here.

I think pittrek is saying that he didn't mind that the dewbacks from the original film were replaced with CG ones in the "look sir, droids" scene and others.

I don't normally pop in on the Revisited threads, but I wanted to say I think Bingowings raises a good point. I can't think of any alternative names to offer, but you guys should read his post in detail.

I have to say cap, I disagree on this one. These covers are much, much better than the batch they did for the UE ones. While I'd be happier with some poster art (and who wouldn't be?), these are solid photoshop jobs that conform to the norm. I especially like the ones for From Russia and Goldfinger, but we can agree to disagree.

1990osu said:

Library of Congress?

Ziggy Stardust said:

Since I haven't posted or been online in nearly a month, somebody should fill me in on everything I've missed.

Really? San Diego, but not LA? A surprise, but not an unwelcome one. Then again, I know the multiplex they're showing it at and it's pretty awful. First world problems, folks.

Thought you guys might want to read this article as well. Granted, you might think he belongs higher on the list, but for George to be on this list at all is pretty noteworthy.

I wish they'd given Marcia Lucas some credit for the fantastic editing of Star Wars, but hey - Kurtz and Kasdan getting the credit for why we love these movies is already a step up.

^Someone else did, Doctor M to be precise. His retitled "Reinventing the Wheel" set is no longer online to my knowledge... it was tough to find even four years ago! I only managed to get Star Wars.

La La's pretty amazing. They're the one responsible for the release of the Batman: the Animated Series soundtrack.

While I'm uninterested in this set I find it amazing that they're doing this. More power to them and I hope it sells wel.