canofhumdingers

While I agree with the general ideas of this thread and the misuse/abuse of the english language, I find it amusing to see people who dislike the incorrect use of words using words incorrectly themselves.

Despite what Merriam-Webster might say, irregardless is NOT a word!!

People who use this word generally mean regardless.  However, adding the prefix "ir" means "not."  But you also have a suffix meaning "not" that creates a double negative within the word itself.  So, while they mean "not regarding information 'x'", they are saying "not not regarding..." or "regarding information information 'x'", which is precisely what they DO NOT mean!

I'm learning Japanese, but I'm still in the very beginning stages & unfortunately can't help you with this.

I agree with trying another board.  There are several people on the Godzilla forum I go to (monsterzero, currently hosted at scifijapan.com) who can read japanese and answer questions like this quite often (well, it's usually about giant monster related things, but you get the idea).

Ripplin said:

- Pro Stars cereal
- Cracklin' Oar Bran (still made, apparently, but I haven't seen it in a coupla decades, and pics online don't look quite right)
- Chipopities
- Code Red Mountain Dew
- Cherry and/or Vanilla and/or Cherry Vanilla Coke (if you put a couple of drops of almond exrtract in a glass of regular Coke, it sorta tastes like Cherry Coke)
- Holiday Spice Pepsi
- Sprite Ice

Something that should never--and probably will never--come back:

- Pepsi Blue

 

 Cherry Coke, Code Red, and Cracklin' Oat Bran are alive and well in Minnesota...

As for me, I'd love to have some 1989 Batman cereal again.

C3PX said:

auximenies said:

It's hard not to turn this into a "WHAT?? YOU DON'T LIKE THAT MOVIE??" thread...

 

canofhumdingers said:

Bladerunner

Wah? Aaaah! Eeeerr! Errr! Grrrrgle! Choke! Cough! Grrrrrrgle! Choke! Gasp! Gasp! Gaaaassp! Choke! Grrrgle! Choke! Gasp! Grrgle! Gasp! Small choke! Gasp! Thud...

Narration: In an attempt to avoid uttering the words "WHAT?? YOU DON'T LIKE THAT MOVIE??" C3PX seems to have bitten his tongue so hard that he choked to death on his own blood.

 I knew that one would give some the same reaction seeing Lawrence of Arabia in this thread gave me...  But yeah.  I really wanted to like it.  Heard lots of good things.  But just couldn't get into it.

Hmm, looking through AFI's list(s)...  I haven't seen all of them, but I've seen a lot.  While hate is perhaps too strong, I don't like Forrest Gump, Fantasia, Titanic, or Bladerunner (that one even surprised me as I've liked pretty much every film Harrison Ford did in the 80's & I love scifi & film noir).

But I do hate one... I hated Lord of the Rings.  I even gave the second one a shot & hated it too.  Never even tried to watch the 3rd one.

Warbler said:

Another movie that I say I hate, but it just confuses me: 2001.

If you want to understand the film, read the book.  Everything you don't understand in the movie is explained.  Some people have the opinion that the book explains too much & doesn't let the audience draw their own conclusions.  But I think it really enhances the movie experience.

I really liked the movie before reading the book, but now I LOVE the movie.

I can also understand the frustration some might have, needing to read the book in order to understand the movie. But again, I think they did it right b/c the explanations in the book would not translate to film well & I like it left as being implied rather than implicitly stated in the movie.

If you want to know the basic premise.... SPOILERS AHEAD

Spoiler:

It's aliens.  They plant the monoliths at key points in the evolution of man.  they planted the seeds of life on earth, then come back to check up on it.  The aliens started as mortals like us.  then as their technology advanced past nature, they transfered their consciousness into machines.  Then they evolved to the point that they had no bodies at all, being essentialy gods.  & now man is on the same journey & dave bowman is the first human to transcend the need for a physical body.

interesting.  I didn't know much about resume, but what I did applied to dvd players.  I assumed that bluray must operate on at least  a similar (if not exactly the same) principle.  Sounds like they are, in fact, completely and utterly different.  Crazy!

the feature you guys are talking about is called the "resume" function (as in, resuming the show where you left off).  Some players have it, some dont.  Some allow you to set various preferences for the resume option.  I have a PS3 & it doesn't default to resume (even if you turn the player off while the movie is playing), but I've never checked to see if it can be turned on because I never really cared one way or the other about the feature.

The DVD player on my computer (I use Windows Media Center as it was the player I liked best of the various ones that came pre installed) has one of the nicer resume features as it can be turned on & off easily, remembers EVERYTHING, and even if you turn it off for a while, when you turn it back on, it still remembers all the disc locations from before turning it off.

Tatooine is there, just gotta pick a hot, dry place.

TheBoost said:

I've always liked the scene because "We would be honored, if you would join us." isn't just evil... it's SARCASTIC. It's the only time we see Vader just straight be a dick.

 What about "apology accepted, Captain Needa..."?  I'd say that's pretty frickin sarcastic.

I always assumed it was a combination of the force and his roboticness...   He used the force to be able to "catch" the blasts, both controlling his movements/reaction time (much like Luke with the training probe or death star shot) and possibly altering the trajectory of the laserbolts away from his center of mass (can the force do that? I don't see why not if you're good enough...).  Then he used his glove & robot hand to actually absorb the energy of the blast.  I assumed hsi glove was like his body suit, which was always supposed to be somewhat protective based on the EU stuff available (this is going on the stuff from when I was a kid, back when EU was still fairly sporadic & actually interesting)

Well, you said you bought one, then your mother was going to give you one for christmas, which would be number two.  At least, the way you worded your post, that's how i understood it.

ARgh!  I had a response all ready & then IE froze.... rrrggggh!

Anyway, no, you're not too big of a geek!  (who say's geeks need to be "cool" anyway?)  I've wanted one of these since they came out but I literally have nowhere to put something so large.

In answer to Zombie's question, we display it of course!  It's not really any different than hanging a picture on your wall or putting a sculpture on the mantle.  It's something you like to have on display in your house.  I'm certainly not saying toys are fine art, but the basic principle is the same.  Now, certainly, some collectors go overboard letting the collection take over their homes and lives.  But within reason, it can be a fun hobby just like anything else.

I collect OT Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Godzilla.  I don't buy everything, just what I like, when i can afford it (actually my wife buys more for me than I buy myself these days).  I have one room in my house (the spare bedroom, which is also our "office" area) where I display my stuff.  As my collection gets larger, I either rearrange things to make space for new items or I put something(s) in storage to make room for something new.  My wife collects antique kitchenware & dishes which she displays in our dining room buffet cabinet.  There's not nearly enough room for all her dishes so she rotates them in and out of storage, periodically changing her display.  As my collection outgrows my space, I'm adopting the same practice. 

I've never understood people who seem judgemental of toy collectors when it's often deemed fine for someone who is obsessed with sports to have a room dedicated to sports memorabilia (somehow that's more "grownup").

Anyway, you're not too big of a nerd.  Though if you decide you only need one, I'm sure i could find SOMEWHERE to put one...

Here's some clickable thumbnails of my room for those interested.

ChainsawAsh said:

And The Dark Knight's shifting aspect ratio isn't OAR - IMAX's aspect ratio is 1.44:1 (preserved on the IMAX Prologue bonus feature on the Batman Begins Blu-Ray), while the Blu-Ray crops this to 1.78:1 (16:9) to fill a widescreen television.

 Yeah, I know the imax scenes are cropped to 16 x 9, which is why i said it mimics the imax presentation.  It's still a really cool feature.   And while it would be nice to have the full frame imax sequences, someone (i don't remember if it was Nolan, or someone else working on the film) makes an interesting point in one of the special features.  They're talking about the Imax format, how big the screen is, and how the human eye works.  They said that, basically, the screen is so tall that the top third of the frame is only in your periferal vision.  So when framing shots, they pretty much "threw away" the top third of the frame.  Which was not to say that they didn't pay attention to what was there, but that they didn't put anything crucial to the shot in the top 3rd.  Which is pretty much the part that gets cropped off for the bluray.  So, again, while it'd be nice to have the whole frame available, i don't really feel like i'm missing anything important after watching that feature.  (& i'm normally a real stickler for things like preserving the original aspect ratio).

Ziz said:

Well, I took half a plunge into BluRay - I got a BD drive for my computer, which I will eventually run a cable to the TV.  For $80, I figured it was a good deal compared to a stand alone player, even a Magnavox or Sylvania for $170.

So, what movies SHOULD I get on Blu?  For moment earlier this week, I was debating buying Watchmen on Blu because it has more supplemental features than the standard DVD, but of course Murphy's Law struck and I bought and opened the standard disc last night, so I can't return it now.  I'll get the Ultimate cut on Blu in December.

I'm not looking to re-buy my entire collection, I'd rather be more selective.  Comedies and dramas don't need Blu.  (Ok, maybe the Remastered Godfather box set qualifies, but that's it.)

Suggestions?

By all means get the Close Encounters of the Third Kind bluray set.  It has all three versions of the film in very well remastered 1080p plus tons of great extras.  & it can be had for a steal of a price if you shop around.  Others I have that look great are The Dark Knight (even switches aspect ratios in film, mimicing the IMAX release, highly reccomended), 2001: A Space Oddyssey (looks fantastic & is a HUGE improvement over either dvd version), Transformers, The Searchers (Robert A. Harris did this restoration if i'm not mistaken.  looks great).  If you liked Crystal Skull, the bluray is really nice.  A Nightmare Before Christmas is decent as well.   From what i hear, the Casablanca set is really nice & the Lawrence of Arabia bluray should be fantastic as it's the restored version that was SUPPOSED to be on dvd but somehow only wound up on the superbit realease...

ChainsawAsh said:

You can easily use seamless branching on the originals.  I don't see why that's a problem at all.  Of course, everything would have to be color-corrected to match (hopefully the SEs to match the OOT).

I'd rather have the SEs be seamlessly-branched together, but have the original versions on separate discs, mainly so I can throw the SE discs away entirely like I did with the GOUT.  But I don't see why they couldn't do seamless-branching if they wanted to.

 Well, if you wanted the REAL OOT, seamless branching might not be viable.  When they made the 97 SE they recomposited a LOT of the sfx shots, including shots that were otherwise untouched (this is how they got rid of the see-through snowspeeders).  When they recomposited these shots, they're not EXACTLY the same as the originals b/c somethings such as laser blasts now happen a few frames sooner or later than they did originally.  It's nitpicky i know, but it's technically not the originals if they use these recomposites.  & again, it's not to say seamless branching couldn't work, but i doubt they'd branch for shots like that that are SOO close, but not exactly the same & if they did, there'd be a LOT more branching which might get cumbersome.

I'd always heard that the shoe was in the ROTJ space battle as a background ship & there was one potato as a background asteroid in ESB.

That's fine.  I agree that constructive criticism is a good thing, but much of what you've posted is more like cynicism.  I mean, this:

Vaderisnothayden said:

Shadows of the Empire really pissed me off.

The Yuzhaan Pong invasion was a stupid idea. 

is not constructive in any way.  It's just negative.  This thread was intended to celebrate the things we like & enjoy which can be refreshing.  Constructive criticism is not bad, it's just not what this thread is about & that's why people (myself included) don't really like what you're posting in this thread.  It's not that we want to single you out, argue, or that we even disagree with it all (i agree with many of your points).  It's just that this is not the thread for it. 

Sometimes it's fun and enjoyable to just think about and discuss the things that make you happy or you enjoy without getting bogged down with all the things you'd have done differently or would like to change.  It's nice to just feel satisfied.

SOOOO back on topic....

 I totally forgot about the videogame side of the EU....  I know it's been mentioned many times before, but i think the Kyle Katarn games (Dark Forces, Dark Forces 2: Jedi Knight, & Jedi Knight 2: Jedi Outcast specifically) REALLY captured the adventuresome feel of 1977 like no other games before or since.  I recently played JK2 again & really got a kick out of the level where you're sneaking around an imperial docking bay to get onto that huge star destroyer type ship.  You're having to sneak past officers, troops, and stormtroopers using stealth, mind tricks, and ingenuity (such as blacking out a room & using night vision) & they just really nailed the feel of being a jedi (ben kenobi...) sneaking around a large imperial base (death star....), right down to the conversations between the stormtroopers you overhear.  I particularly like the one trooper who brags about the biggest ship he's been assigned to, only to admit that it wound up being really boring b/c they never did anything (at which point i happened to burst from my hiding place & dispatch him and his friend).

Oh yeah, they also got the abilities of a Jedi RIGHT without making them superhuman cartoons.  You are powerful, doing things no ordinary human could do, but it is still subtle and not flashy.  It's like the creators really took notes on Ben Kenobi & Yoda from the OT b/c that's exactly how it feels ingame.

I really like The Han Solo Adventures by Brian Daley.  Three novels written before ESB came out that really capture the "big galaxy" adventure feel and imagination that made Star Wars so great.

I also enjoy the odd bit of EU here and there just as a throwback to being a kid & making up my own adventures in a galaxy far far away.  In fact, I read that comic book where Boba Fett and Darth Vader fight recently & actually enjoyed it quite a bit.  It was corny & i certainly don't look at it as canon, but when viewing it in the light of something I might've played out with my action figures as a kid (what kid didn't have Vader & Boba Fett fight on some lazy saturday afternoon?) it was pretty fun.

I find that I mostly enjoy the odd EU story from the 70's/80's & from the Star Wars "rennaisance" of the mid 90's than most current fare.  I don't enjoy the prequels or particularly some of the mysteries that were answered/revealed that didn't live up to what I had imagined previously & so many EU stories that have come since 1999 hold no interest for me.  I moreso enjoy stories that retain some of the mystery & leave some things unanswered.  An example being some of the tidbits about the Clone Wars & the capital city on Coruscant (which i had always pronounced "core-US-can't" before TPM & still prefer) that we got in the Heir to the Empire trilogy.  There was enough information to wet your appetite & start up your imagination without giving too much away & ruining the thrill of not knowing exactly what happened & having to draw your own conclusions or piece together your own backstory based on the tidbits presented.

I agree that store displays don't even come close to showing off how amazing a properly set up quality HD tv with bluray looks.  The store displays are often bottom of the barrel crap LCD sets straight out of the box with no calibration (Target, i'm looking at you!!).  Not to mention the Spiderman series isn't the best thing to judge it by, as the effects in those films looked cartoony & unconvincing even in theaters.  Watch something older like the incredible Close Encouters of the Thrid Kind blu ray or John Ford's The Searchers.  It's like watching your very own brand new print of the film (not that the films look brand new, they look as they should, a product of their times; but that the prints look freshly struck, unmarred by the dirt and scratches of repeated showings).

Oh, & Fang Zei, you should look up some information on properly calibrating a tv.  It's not that hard or complicated to make some basic adjustments that will make your tv look far better than any of those attrocious factory presets (especially "VIVID" !! UGH!!).  If you want something basic to get started, there's actually a pretty simple THX calibration exercise included on many dvds including all the star wars dvds (even the GOUT bonus discs) that i've used to pretty decent results.

gah, that's the hideous attempt at a darth vader costume from Revenge of the Sith.

well, the board was having issues when i originally tried to respond to this, but basically, I said it was a cool idea (like Jay says, fixed vertical height is a good thing imo).  But ultimately, i don't think this is that good of an idea.  Personally, i think the 16x9 ratio is a GOOD compromise between all the different common ratios.  I find it the most economical solution when it comes to the size of the tv vs. the amount of screen realestate wasted on black bars when watching anything that doesn't fill the screen.  I mean, just think about how much of the screen will be wasted when watching an older academy ratio (4x3 roughly) film on this new set!  With a 16x9 tv, less than half of the screen space is ever "wasted" for any of the common ratios.

EDIT: Forgot to mention that this concept (fixed height setup) is great for movie theaters.  Or for people for whom money and space are not constraints so that they can get a big enough set that the wasted screen space doesn't matter when watching other aspect ratios.  But for the average consumer I just don't see this being as pratical of a solution as a 16x9 ratio.  As an example, when I switched from a standard to an HD tv, I went from a 27" to a 42" so that i wouldn't lose any vertical picture size.  & that meant my new tv was roughly twice as wide as my old one.  I have nowhere in my house to reasonably put a 2.35x1 tv that would have the same vertical height as my current tv, & i (like MOST of the world) can't afford a home theater room that could house one big enough.

okay okay okay.... get this. I've got this killer idea for a western... It starts out with this farm boy who lives with his aunt and uncle. Only he hates being a farmboy.... So they hire these two new hands to work on the farm, only the hands are running from the law... the law catches up with them.almost. and kills he aunt & uncle in effort to find the fugitives. the farm boy & fugitives escape with the help of this old hermit from the hill country to a local bar & hire a gunslinger to help them escape.... so they all escape.... are you ready for this?... In His SPACESHIP.... because it's not a western. IT'S A WESTERN IN FREAKING OUTER SPACE. *stares with the intensity of Jack Black's mind blown stare*

here's some more.... i really love the opera house!

http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/the-ultimate-home-theater-rooms

that concept's not new.  people have been building home theaters for years.  Some of them get REALLY elaborate.  There's one guy who has a replica of the enterprise bridge... it was awesome.

Edit:  the guy i was talking about apparently has a whole website about the thing... here it is.

http://www.reighn.com/