captainsolo

The Bourne Trilogy, because I'll probably see Legacy at some point. I'm somewhat reminded of my feelings on the Nolan Batmans.

Identity- is a film I still enjoy because it is both simple and refreshing in a way. It doesn't always feel like a big studio movie, and  I think that's why I enjoy it so much. 95% of the book is thrown out, but the characters are allowed to interact with one another to make the film the most engaging of the three. I know it's not perfect, but it still works.

3.5 balls out of 4.

Supremacy shows things starting to go downhill. The book is lost completely, and Bourne becomes a one-note machine designed for plot advancement. It's enjoyable on the extreme surface level, but as soon as you look anywhere past the silly shakycam the extremely obvious underdeveloped writing becomes quickly apparent. A disjointed disappointment.

2.5 balls out of 4.

Ultimatum is a chase movie and nothing more. There are brief attempts to depict the initiation of Bourne into the secret government program etc. but in the end these are not developed enough to really mean much of anything. The production was working against a tight deadline without a script, so it's simple wall to wall action sequences with yet more CIA figureheads having internal power struggles. The story is woven around the end of the last film, and this leads to some overall sloppiness and repetition right down to having another fairly incomprehensible car chase that almost exactly mirrors the one at the end of Supremacy. The ending leaves room for an obvious sequel.

2 balls out of 4.

None of these have any of the complexity of the novels. The first two books are some of the finest espionage novels I've ever read, and immensely plotted. The two film sequels are one-note characterizations of the new version established by the first film. When the original director and longtime pursuer of the film rights, Doug Liman, was thrown off the franchise, the series took an immediate hit because they lost their heart.

How are they going to make this work? IMAX letterboxed 2.35 Dark Knight style, or a blowup to fill the 1.44 screen?

This will be interesting to say the least.

As far as we know, no.

Audio will probably follow the standard of the 5.1 tracks being DTS-HDMA with the original audio at standard Dolby 2.0 at a low bitrate.

bkev said:

 

captainsolo said:

that awful artificial blue tint on the opening of OHMSS.

When the movie aired on usa in HD, this tint wasn't there (or was at least much, much more subdued). The blus have fixed at least a few issues that the DVDs had such as the ridiculous oversaturation on L&LD

 

Confirmed as fixed:

These were provided by a member of the Bond and Beyond forum. UE DVD on left, HD version from Itunes on right.

UE:

HD:

Much better, but still not quite all there. George's face here seems to be a bit off somehow.

This is where it gets a bit iffy. The source is identical on all the MGM discs, just with better image with each successive issue. The SE DVDs will give you superior image but at a cost: Edge enhancement, compression artifacts, cropping of the first three to 1.78:1, spots of interlacing, and greatly enhanced video noise that isn't film grain.

I lucked out and got a great CRT set, so I stick with LD. (Though I only have a few of the SE titles to be honest. Why some people charge an arm and a leg for those old boxes is beyond me.)

On the first three I still stick with the Connery Collection as it looks exactly like the VHS tapes I grew up on. I haven't found Criterion copies yet, but the MGM discs show off the color I'm used to. The PCM mono is another big draw and sounds great, though FRWL has quite a bit of print source background crackle like listening to an LP. (It does however have a great isolated score and effects track that is dedicated and not faked like some others I have. Chinatown's still has the dialogue audible.) Also, these are theatrical 1.66 as opposed to the Criterions which are cropped.

I don't know if you could call it an International version; it's really just an alternate mix, and the more I dig into the films troubled history, it may actually be the original mono audio.  Every mono track utilizes this mix, and those that are different seem to all derive from the 1995 Dolby Stereo surround mix done for the CAV boxset. To get this mono audio with notable differences either the 1989 disc or CC Vol. 2 will work. They seem actually to be identical, save for two odd audio glitches on each. (My 1989 copy has Connery stutter in Cafe Martinque and order Dom Perignon Perignon '55. The CC version has the music essentially vanish for a minute or so whilst entering his hotel room and rewinding the tape. I don't know if these are just my copies or errors. Both very small.)

The CAV collector's sets of GF and TB are the best looking and pressed on LD in beautiful boxes, but more expensive with TB having the new remix and GF being the first release to have those frames snipped out of Oddjob's car turning off the side road with Mr. Solo. TB is necessary for the new mix (sounds phenomenal) and the employment of full CAV for image fidelity. These were later issued in CLV THX editions which are very scarce.

It was thought that TB went through restoration for this CAV set and has better color, but after very close comparison between all three discs, it just isn't so. All three utilize the exact same transfer with the exact same damage marks, tics, and one really stubborn hair in the gate. The CAV looks slightly better due to being newer and in the CAV format. (You also get this on Side 3 of the other two.)

If you want all the 60's era, both Connery Collections+ OHMSS should do as I haven't seen any real difference between the 1989 series titles I own and those found in the sets. I have TB and YOLT in both but typically watch my 1989 discs as they are cleaner and my copy of the CC vol. 2 is pretty worn. You'll get DAF too if you go this route but the print used for DAF on the LDs is pretty worn and damaged in places. At least it has the correct timing.

Pick from these and get whatever is cheapest and in the best shape. Condition really matters on these and you don't want video noise popping up throughout. (Poor DAF.) You will certainly want OHMSS on LD though, as it is the only release (Besides my 1995 Letterbox VHS) that is fully uncut and without error in picture or sound.

To be honest, I haven't needed anything else for the 60's era since going the LD route. The SE DVDs aren't that great looking and their flaws are really apparent on modern displays. Doctor No has horrible video noise that coats the whole movie in speckling. OHMSS is quite good but has errors and missing dialogue.

The first time I popped in anything from this era was the 1989 YOLT disc. Things looked good on the opening, but as soon as it cut from the official's meeting to Ling's apartment -BAM! Skin tones, the red walls..everything was properly back. TB was the same, and things like the bomb sled really jump out colorwise on a CRT. Skin tones are perfect. OHMSS has similar vibrant spots of color.

I think I have to watch these again now after talking all this time...;)

This was rumored to be in the works a year or two ago and I wrote in asking for more information. (In some crazy hopes of landing some kind of job on the production though I have no drawing skills whatsoever.) It is set up to be a two-part adaptation with each part at about 80 minutes.

Though I applaud their efforts, the animation isn't very exciting to me, being computer generated and in a more Asian style. The storylines also seem to be compressed a bit too much to fit into the PG-13 80 minute timeframe.

And an animated DKR with no Kevin Conroy? Ugh the missed opportunity!

Here's the best source for direct comparisons between the UE transfers and the older SE DVDs which used the same master sources that MGM used on all their 90's era video releases. (FF, this is why that same stubborn hair in the gate under the Rack is in Thunderball from 1989 to 2002. Same recycled transfer but better pressings over time.)

http://www.bulletsnbabesdvd.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3053

You can also see screencaps form the original Region 2 editions which were released first and had issues that were corrected for the Region 1 discs. (Though hastily.)

Overall, I think that they nailed two or three of the films imagewise-those being Dimaonds are Forever, The Man With The Golden Gun, Moonraker and Licence to Kill. DAF is quite close and looks stunning though some of the colors aren't quite 1971 vintage. TMWTGG is stellar though I don't see enough Technicolor. Moonraker is one of the best transfers I've ever seen and the colors are about 99% accurate. LTK is very very slightly different, but fantastic and is the only release that is fully uncut. (save for some rumored obscure foreign releases back in the early 90's)

Other verdicts: (those with * look better on old editions)

*Doctor No, *FRWL, *Goldfinger: had some amazing cleanup work done, but the color seems to be off and downright muted in most places.

*Thunderball: Clean but with wrong color all over the place. Needs a re-do.

*YOLT: Lacking color that showed off the sunny countryside of Japan. Missing all the deep yellow/brown/orange tint of the 1967 presentation. Re-do.

*OHMSS: Framing a bit shifted to the right, a very tiny shot was accidentally inserted in error, opening blue tinted, some audio errors, no 60's Technicolor look. Re-do.

LALD: The UE DVD was shorn of grain structure and very soft. Contrast boosted and not good looking at all. This has been corrected for the most part.

*TSWLM: All transfers don't look so hot. The film was shto with a lot of soft focus and diffusion which has never been replicated well. The UE removed the original color timing and was full of edge enhancement. Original audio was missing as well. Re-do.

FYEO: Great detail in the UE but some definite color manipulation. Overall great, but slightly different from original.

OP: Same here, great improvement in detail but slight color manipulation.

AVTAK: Looks fantastic, and like a print of the film almost. Color spot on if a bit tweaked. However, the opening teaser is horribly cropped, and you lose information to cropping on top, bottom and sides of the frame throughout. Without the cropping this would be close with MR's transfer.

TLD: Great transfer, very slight modifications to contrast and darkness levels but only to improve the image for home viewing. Great job.

GE: Different color timing which may or may not be Theatrical. Looks better on the whole. Has the cropping issue which has never been confirmed as an error. Audio is a remix from stems and lacks the huge bassy punch of the original.

Tomorrow Never Dies: gets some major improvement and actually looks like the theatrical presentation instead of video. Audio is a remix and quite good, but nowhere near the incredible theatrical mix. (One of the 5 or so best surround mixes I've heard.)

TWINE: Looks better overall, some contrast boosting, less grain, color may have been tweaked a little. Audio likely a remix as well and lacks the matrixed original 6.1 track. Framed to give a bit more on the top edge.

DAD: UE is better but lacks the original soundmix design of a matrixed 6.1 track.

These are my quick opinions and nitpicks for the most part. As I said 99.99% of people are going to be thrilled with the new set. And as a bonus all the new transfers have the original theatrical subtitles/location text and correct aspect ratios.

Another image comparison, though primarily of European editions which have the wrong colors on some UEs:

http://caps-a-holic.com/index.php?search=james+bond

I recall you talking about that. Yay pickiness!

Yes, buy the Blu set to enjoy the films in and eventually check out an old VHS/LD of the 60's era to see more of their Technicolor look. ;)

The meat of the info can be found here:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Bond-Laserdisc-Preservations-1962-1971/topic/5808/

And the general cropping reference on GE

My childhood gaming was spent losing to all my Genesis games and readily developing my crazy run n' gun gaming strategies. I still pull out my MK 1 Genesis for some more pain.

I'm also a huge arcade freak though always limited in what I can find nowadays.Still freeze anytime I hear Galaga, OutRun, Robotron 2084, attraction cues- or Star Wars Trilogy Arcade, my favorite game of all time.

I love pinball machines, but the first to admit I'm middling at best. No supple wrist. ;)

Still play my old Genesis, PSX, N64, and Gamecube. I always buy the console after they've been dead a few years. I started doing this because I noticed how cheap they were as a kid once discarded and that they were just as fun.

And my Game Gear's screen finally died recently. Noooooooo!

BTW worst SW game ever: Yoda Stories, Game Boy Color. The horror.

Exactly. They were originally done by Lowry Digital which has a reputation for going overboard.

That said, this is as close as you're going to get to anything as of now. The alternatives are the old DVDs riddled with compression artifacts, edge enhancement and some improper ratios or go the crazy LD route like myself.

They've at least included the original mixes for the first 16 and have fixed some of the DVD issues on the previously released Blu-rays. It's a iffy subject but as I said 99.99% of people will be thrilled. If you have none of the Bonds then this is a no-brainer. They're close enough for the most part, but if you know these back to front to back like me then it gets frustrating.

TDKR is a mix of elements from Knightfall, No Man's Land and DKR. By appropriating these you'd think that there would be more to go on, but there isn't. It's all tossed together in one giant melting pot and severely underdeveloped like the Michael Mann movies that inspired it. (Heat or Public Enemies anyone?)

Kinghtfall is a great story arc, though a bit dodgy here and there. Try the novel version. Same goes for No Man's Land.

DKR did indeed change everything, and is without a doubt one of the best pieces of literature I have ever read. Take all of the hype you've heard about Watchmen and go read this instead. It is still an unbelievable read canonical or not. A film version with Kevin Conroy has long been a dream. (Though the new DCAU movie version-gulp-cast someone else)

My largest problem with the film, and indeed the part that I find infuriating is the idea that Bruce can simply stop, that the Batman can "win". There is no win or lose, because one man can never possibly hope to make any sort of difference in the world. That is his curse, the curse he himself assigned to carry in his childhood torment. When examined the meaning of Batman is insignificant which is what makes his sacrifice all the more interesting.He is the shadowy figure of the night, a damaged shell of a man holding an obsessive repressed tragic figure who dedicates his existence to detecting and stopping injustice.

But no, we get a guy in some body armor who gets some vertebrae dislocated and thrown in a hole. Big deal. Bane originally paralyzed Batman completely and left him for nothing. Why? Because the focus was not all on the Batman because The Batman is the avenger of Gotham not it's most photogenic inhabitant!

BTW Zombie try the sequel Dark Knight Strikes Again. It's a very very weird read because it incorporates the humor and oddities found in Miller's current style but at it's core there is some semblance of a continuation to DKR.

This trilogy has indeed be a version of the character with it's own separate universe and identity, but lacks the constants of the basic character that must be present to maintain that sense of Batman's character identity. But this is how it goes in every modern reboot, so why am I surprised?

PS: Anybody here like Miller's All Star Batman & Robin? That was one of the most diabolically hysterical things I've eve read. People just took it seriously when some of the comedic gold was pouring out from the panels.

I was crying with laughter throughout this. It's hysterical how ridiculous they act.

Warb, I meant a video release designed for videophiles like an audiophile SACD or vinyl reissue from a master tape as done by those companies I mentioned. I've just wanted to see modern technology applied to the films' original states instead of the single image harvest only done on 10 of the films which completely disregarded color timing, grain structure and their original presentation. This is what frustrates me to no end with the UE discs and the Blus derived from the same transfers. I can be more satisfied with a 420i image sourced from a worn print transferred in the the late 1980's, pressed on laser then I am on these new editions. Yes the detail is increased and everything has been corrected, but to me it seems overdone and I want to cry when I see things like how badly You Only Live Twice is desaturated or that awful artificial blue tint on the opening of OHMSS.

As far as audio goes, I do get better sound on LD. LD has the original mixes in PCM whereas on the Blus they are lossy Dolby Digital ac3 tracks that are almost always noise reduced and compressed. The lossless files on the new editions are 5.1 remixes done at various locations which add unnecessary and new effects to the soundfield to artificially create a surround image which is not present in the original audio. To add to this they typically used the remastered music cues from the soundtrack CD masters and actually replaced the original score recordings. So these have been taken apart multiple ways and stuck back together to resemble the original, which they are not.

And on the 90's era films they lost a lot of punch. Goldeneye on LD has some of the punchiest bass and LFE I've ever heard on any home audio track.

These will be great releases for 99.99% of people and the box makes great economic sense. But I'm still not quite sold and this is coming from someone who still has 30+ Bond VHS tapes. You have to understand that this is my filmic obsession and I jump out of my chair at even the slightest infraction on any of the films. (I really do.)

Sky, the cropping on GE is indeed pretty extensive, but I'm not sure if this has ever been addressed. It's not quite in a different ratio but it is cropped on all four sides as if boxed in. The title sequence has different fonts and placements which has led some to believe that a Pan n' scan prepped print was mistakenly used. The DVD wasn't bad and in some instances I liked the tighter framing for more impact. however, we'd really know if the director or cinematographer commented on what they shot. If it is like the previous transfers then they kept the framing a bit loose, or the original LD/DVDs were framed too openly. However the HDTV versions floating around are exactly the same as the UE transfer.

Thunderball still has color issues on the current Blu-ray.

This brings me to my other point. Only 10 of the films (Doctor No-Golden Gun, Moonraker) were scanned from the o-neg at 4K as shown in the big promos. The rest came straight from video masters and are not what they could be. Why only do 10?

And in a perfect world, the George Lazenby single film ultra collectors edition set would be a top seller along with the Roger Moore box in the shape of a raised eyebrow. ;)

Glad these are coming out as singles, which I'm not surprised over. The UE discs were repackaged at least 10-15 different times in both single and double disc sets. I don't need a big flimsy book with discs getting scratched up in page slots, and certainly do not need CR or QOS.

There should be a videophile label akin to Analogue Productions, Audio Fidelity, and MFSL for audiophiles that obtains the rights to make a 007: Technicolor Theatrical Editions box set. There is not one of these classics that I enjoy more on Blu than LD.

greenpenguino said:

Bump!

 

If glass breaks, unless you're John McClane, you won't get any cuts on you.

Or Jackie Chan. ;) Police Story is still sequence-for-sequence one of the best action films ever made.

<p>Wow, that would be something interesting...a full length movie based upon the pre-Robin tales of 1939...a more brooding and demonic dark avenger of the night akin to The Shadow and The Phantom, but from hell...Rated R and The Batman carries a gun. ;)</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>TDKR still perplexes me. Freaking weird movie that can't make up it's mind about anything. As a movie it fails, and as a Batman story it undermines the major theme of the character which is something I thought Nolan would be fascinated with.</p>

<p>Really, really, really hope they do new encodes as the Blus currently out are all single layer with outdated video and audio, and not at all representative of how they could look with the new Final Cut.</p>
<p>Plus <em>Dangerous Days</em> would be great in HD!!</p>

7!

The Aluminum Falcon said:

Notorious

I watched a 1950s 35mm reissue print this weekend at a local theater. It was a fantastic experience. The movie, as always was wonderful. It's perhaps my 2nd favorite Hitchcock behind Vertigo, but it's definitely the most watchable Hitchcock for me. The plot is interestingly merely functional but the characters and their dynamics propel the story nicely. I didn't spot any incompetent actors in the movie at all. This is one movie that I can proudly say has no bad acting that dates it: no useless comic relief here.

The crowd was incredibly receptive, and the theater was surprisingly full. The ending got lots of wry laughter, as I recall. It was a very old theater, so that definitely made the viewing more "authentic" to the times. Ingrid Bergman and Cary Grant were stunning on the big screen. The 35mm print was dusted and scratched in some areas, though, all in all, it was surprisingly good for its age. Film always has this wonderful warmth and texture to it. The grain never got intrusive, to me; gate weave prevented the picture from seeming sterile. Of course, the cue marks popped up every now and then. I doubt I'd have enjoyed a digital presentation as much.

On one note, I noticed that the exposure seemed to change in certain shots; while it initially seemed to be a flaw in the film print, I noticed that the film became darker (*a change in exposure*) on shots of Claude Rains where he's being menacing/forboding. I do wonder if it's intentional. In any case, intentional or not, it's absent from the DVDs or BDs. The dangers of restoration I suppose...

10 out of 10 stolen keys

The Killer

I watched an Anamorphic DVD-Rebuilder authoring of the Criterion edition at home. The video and audio were unimpressive, though the subtitles seemed to be an accurate translation. I have a feeling this was an LD transfer of a 35mm print, definitely unrestored but not DVNR'ed. They never seemed odd or machine-translated. This was my first time watching the movie, and this was my second time watching a Hong-Kong John Woo film, after Hard Boiled a few years ago.

It was good. I liked it. Chow Yun-Fat was at the top of his game, and, so were the supporting actors. The story was good. It was far more dramatic than I expected. In fact, I would probably classify it as a drama with action scenes, as opposed to an action movie that happens to be dramatic at times. The story is basic, yet well done and compelling here: a man seeks to help a woman he injured. Despite the drama, the tone never seemed to get too dark with one exception (which I will get to in a second). Check out the banter between characters. There's a certain humor to the titular Killer at times; he's not a bad man, and he isn't a solemn one either. The most obvious humor is, of course, the whole Butt-Head and Numb-Nuts schtick; it's present without overstating its blatancy. Needless to say, the action scenes were fantastic here. Good gun play, just a bit below Hard Boiled.

If I had one problem with this movie, it was the ending. Prior to the very ending, I liked the movie a lot. It was amiable and a very exciting ride; I felt the drama/emotion, but not to the point of despairing over it. In other words, it was a proper drama, without resorting to being overly sappy. Now, to preface this, I have no prior problems with bleak endings. None whatsoever. If a character, even the protagonist, deserves to die or needs to die to emphasize a point of the movie, it's fine by me, such as in Get Carter, Donnie Darko, Alien 3, Sin City, Shallow Grave, Evil Dead, Return of the Living Dead, and Night of the Living Dead. If anything, it's unjustified happy endings, especially studio-imposed ones, that get under my skin and bug me, such as Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein, Dawn of the Dead, Army of Darkness, and Blade Runner.

But, having said that, this ending just killed me. It was an awful downer of an ending. Frankly, it ruined the movie for me; I'm not sure I even want to watch this film again, knowing it ends like this. I had foreseen/expected a sad ending, but not to this extent. I'd expected the titular Killer to die, but then donate his corneas to her. That would be sad, but it'd be somewhat just. He was a killer; he deserves to die. He "broke" her eyes in life, now he can "fix" them in death. That would be an ending I could live with. I can just picture the scene of the police officer taking her to the operation and fulfilling his promise.

Instead, though no one emerges happily. The Killer dies, but he's brutally blinded by bullets first; he no longer has anything to give to the girl in death since his eyes are damaged. He can't even reach out and comfort her before he dies. The police officer illegally shoots the surrendering Triad leader multiple times in front of cops. No doubt, he'll be arrested and sent to prison, especially with so many witnesses and his bad status with his boss as it is. Since he'll be locked up, he can't fulfill his promise to John of having them transplant his eyes to the girl; he also can't give the money to the girl and escort her overseas. Speaking of the money, that'll probably get confiscated by the police! Yeah, the money that Sidney died to get is just going to the police. The blind girl isn't going to see any of it. No pun intended. She'll just fade to permanent blindness. Sadly enough.

I know it's just a movie, but the ending really let me down, and was too dark in lieu of the lighter tone of the rest of the movie. Because of the ending, I'd rate this movie:

7 out of 10 guns.

It would have made a 9 with a more satisfying close.

Ah! Two of my all time favorite films. Notorious is the finest B&W Hitchcock and forms a nice balance with the absolute haunted despair of Vertigo. I'm truly envious of your theatrical experience and can only surmise that you saw something made from the surviving 50's era fine grain print materials. This I think would have added to the darkening effect you saw, as closeups and opticals tend to have their visual differences magnified by both wear and the fine grain. The Criterion DVD seems to have a tiny bit of this going on IIRC.

Thanks for mentioning the ending to The Killer. It's not something I often get to discuss, but is absolutely unexpected. I was like you, watching the film for the first time on the Criterion DVD after being blown away by the absolute cinematic force that is Hard Boiled. I was on the edge of my seat the entire time, through all the phenomenal gun battles, mentally pleading for the Killer to escape with Jenny, and then get hit with that. On every level, and I have written about this in detail, this is damning drama. Everyone loses. Everyone. I'm a noir geek, and the word bleak is a very familiar term. This goes far beyond that. This is like a poetic Hong Kong version of Chinatown's denouement. You are reminded that there is real life after all and that there are very few if any happy endings. This is something common in Woo's work, a theme of sorts running through A Better Tomorrow and Bullet in the Head for example.

Though I cannot ever put it above Hard Boiled (I hold them equally), this is one of the most enjoyable pieces of drama I have ever witnessed. A masterpiece.

BTW, the Criterion DVD comes from their laser and is the only good NTSC release, with pretty accurate color and subtitle translation. The Dragon Dynasty DVD/Blu-ray is atrociously converted from a stunning German PAL DVD. Criterion really should get their hands back on these two John Woo masterpieces.

greenpenguino said:

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (2005)

I dunno how I missed this movie before but...

This movie is awesome! If you haven't seen this, go watch it. NOW.

I love the dialogue in this film, it's so great.

One of the 10 best films of the 2000's. Shane Black is back!

Trooperman said:

Just saw "The French Connection" in 35mm.  Great movie.

I missed out on seeing this recently. Still glad the original non-tampered with version was released on Blu-ray, but it's always been a problematic title to transfer due to its extreme grittiness and original Deluxe printing.

The supporting characters in the Nolanverse are made to shoulder the burden of proving their universe's reality. The primary two in TDKR are Catwoman and John Blake.

I saw this Tuesday night and came out initially thinking of putting it on par with TDK, perhaps slightly better, and still far behind Begins.

Then I kept thinking about it, and got a bit angry....and angrier...and angrier...

I originally thought TDK was empty. Oooh boy was I wrong. The wider the scope, the worse these films get.

TDKR is nothing but a extremely too long collection of scenes and setpieces with only a hint of narrative focus. This focus is hard won with a slow first third or so, and then completely disregarded by the inane piling up of plot twist after plot twist after setpiece after revelation with each undoing the one that had just gone before in the final third of the film.

And then it is capped off by the most jaw droppingly silly been done before coincidental please everyone possible ending that is all wrapped up with a big bow on top. And it completely undoes what little shred of Batman's character is left. Pitiful.

And I'm still confused as to how I feel over the damn thing. I do feel it is worse than TDK overall, and most of you all know my huge problems with that film.

I saw one of the 15/70mm IMAX prints, and if at all interested-go see this. this is a one time deal for now of seeing a 70mm film print theatrically. Warning: this gets loud and you may need earplugs if sensitive to piercing sounds. The image wasn't all too impressive to be perfectly honest, with the design of IMAX not really being one for theatrical narrative films. I got the distinct impression of peering through a slightly dirtied round the edges porthole, and the standard Panavision looked flat but with much better color than what would have been the standard digital presentation.

Sound was overly loud in the opening, quieted down and was generally unimpressive. I was more excited by the projector hum in the quiet scenes.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I don't hate the series so much as I'm left cold by it.

I'm not much of a fan of Nolan's films in general to begin with. I do like two of his films - The Prestige and even Batman Begins - and initially enjoyed The Dark Knight well enough. As I saw more and more of his films, though, I was turned off by the convoluted and pretentious storylines he tends to favour. In retrospect, I grew to dislike TDK for the same reasons.

I liked Begins surprisingly. I didn't want another origin story and went in unaware of the project otherwise. It's a good film with narrative focus, design and character. Just think of how much better TDKR would have been if only Ra's had been allowed to just come back!! that said, there were problems and all of these were addressed in the tie-in novelization which is a really great read. Far better than the film in every way.

Then I saw a sneak preview of The Prestige and thought: "What the hell is going on?" I like magicians, historical films, mystery thrillers, films built around adversaries (ex: The Duellists) and could not have been more bored/confused even with the Bowman himself appearing. I thought, "well at least this wont ever get anywhere, it's awful."

Then I start hearing months later about how great this movie is. Did I miss something? TDK only took this to an insanely higher level.

I saw Memento, because it's one of those movies that everyone raves about in film school. Aside from the single  story gag, there is nothing of any resonance. It is slow, dull, tepid and genuinely uninteresting like every other Nolan film that I have seen save for Begins which must have been a fluke or something and Inception which I still have not seen and thus must continue to be ignored...;)

And then there is Nolan's attempt to make Batman and his world realistic. I don't like that idea AT ALL. I like a gothic Gotham and a nightmarish Arkham Asylum, I like the impossible characters like Man-Bat and Mr. Freeze, I like the idea that Batman can team up with a superpowered alien from another world and fight supernatural threats like vampires and zombies. Nolan takes all that away in his films and, frankly, makes the Batman and his world as dull and boring as possible.

Not only was Batman's character mostly stripped away, but so was romanticism, adventure, escapism, and a great deal of emotion. Not saying that the over the top fantasy elements are always necessary, but Nolan makes Batman feel like a psychological probe into the society of a city instead of a tale of the winged avenger.

I also haven't been fond of most of the characterization in his films. Apart from Ledger's Joker, I'm indifferent to almost everyone in the films; Oldman's Gordon, Caine's Alfred, Eckhart's Harvey Dent/Two-Face, etc. - all blah as far as I'm concerned. And, frankly, I dislike Bale's Bruce/Batman. I hate the bulky Batsuit, the smoker's Batvoice, and the "Bruce Wayne is a selfish playboy dumbass" routine. Yeah, I know it comes from the comics, but I still hate it; it irks me as much as Christopher Reeve's Clark Kent.

There is no Wayne in the sequels, just a caricature. The problem is that the characters if looked at closely enough never seem to actually do much of anything other than serve the demands of the plot at their given times.

I always took the Reeve portrayal of Kent as a throwback to 30's screwball comedy, sort of the bumbling straight man who just couldn't be that dumb...or could he? (Think Ralph Bellamy)

Aside from the dream talk with Ra's, there was one moment in the film I genuinely adored. This is the scene of the mock court in a tattered hall where the police etc. are put before a joke trial in front of the new judge on high, Scarecrow. This could come straight from a comic book panel and is at once chilling and endearing. It is of course a throwaway moment, but my favorite.

More to come on this thing, but I'm still puzzled as to what I make of it all.

I had to wait till Tuesday's show and for decent seats. Reason: There were scalpers for IMAX tickets. Standing outside even. WTF?

Damn, seeing all these reminds me of how cinematographers used to know what they were doing. Even the tightest crop on those is relatively protected from losing too much of the valuable information. Heck, looking at those it could even be protected for Academy!

Are you sure the hyperdrive on the Millennium Puggo is deactivated?

--No, but we did manage to knock out the audio processor.

VADER FACEPALMS ;)

Horrible. The midnight show became almost like a rite of passage in your teens. Agreed that it hopefully has nothing to do with the film's story, lest there be attempts to place blame on the filmmakers. (Much as with the crimes blamed on Clockwork Orange) A cinema is the one of the few places in the world to me that is truly sacred. What really disgusts me beyond that is the fact that this obviously happened while the movie was playing with people sitting unaware in the dark. (As a Hitchcock nut I cannot fail to see the parallels with the similar scene in Saboteur.)

I should see the movie later today at the IMAX.

It's so bad to look at or even think of the concept, yet I was was flabbergasted that I somewhat enjoyed it. Then again, I could watch Peter Cushing scrubbing a toilet and be happy.

I had no idea the silent Blackmail was commercially available. Whoa. Definitely need one of the PAL sets now.

FanFiltration said:

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

Oh how I did not enjoy this film.  I did like how it was moving along up until the Venice boat chase, but went down hill fast after that.  The effects were atrocious.  The Scottish disguise bit was so unlike the Indian Jones from the first two films. Turned into a joke, and some great character's are so under utilized.  Marcus was so kewl in the first movie, but here he is just way too goofy.  *frown*

Too disappointed to rate this one.  

:) It's tired. It's made by people who no longer have the drive for making an Indy film. The script was re-edited numerous times, even while shooting. There are numerous moments completely improvised such as the entire tank sequence and motorcycle chase. The character of Elsa makes little to no sense. Donovan is a terrible, dull, lifeless ripoff of Belloq. Marcus and Sallah are ruined. The opening goes on far too long. The staging of the opening boat scene is putrid. The challenge of the things Indy has to go through at the end is not built up very well and this undermines the danger that should be building tension. 

"You've made me catch a sniffle!"

Good points: Sean, Sean, Sean, Sean a thousand times over. He has the time of his life with Jones Sr. and that gleam in his eyes makes you lament his retirement.

The father-son interaction is priceless and the the best part of the film. "she talks in her sleep."

The way Harrison says: "Yes, sir."

The improved sound design. Aside from some of the smaller humorous moments, that's about it. Each time I see the movie again, I like it less and become more frustrated with it. The father-son dynamic is interesting and dramatic yes, but there is so little around that single speck of gold that that speck can be outweighed by the bad. I might like it better on Laser when I find one.

It's really a three star film, trying but never succeeding to win you over. But I still to this day cannot understand how so many prefer this to the fantastic Temple of Doom.