dclarkg

dclarkg is THE BEST username here, period. Some may say that my opinion is biased but trust me, is not.

clutchins said:

Is there no reason to use the 2011 Blu-ray? I was under the impression that it was your base video for all three films.

 That was before the team -1 got the 35m prints, if I'm not mistaken all projects from now on will be based on original 35mm negative scans that are OOT. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Another bumb for an old thread!

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/LCD-TV-Questions/topic/4263/

GundarkHunter said:

Plus the fact that most HD displays @ this point still are not capable of displaying 1080x1920, the full resolution of the highest HD standard.

 And ten years later...

http://www.trustedreviews.com/samsung-110-inch-glassless-3d-8k-s9-series-tv-review

It's funny since I'm currently watching ''A&E Intervention'' on Netflix which is basically old episodes from season 1 and 2 (2005 and 2006), besides the show being in 4:3 format I just can't help to notice that all TV's shown in the episodes are old CRTs, also all cell phones are regular nokia/motorola non-touch screen devices.

10 years... go figure

NeverarGreat said:

It's not a question of could they, it's should they.

 Yes, they should!

darklordoftech said:

Why get bogged down in a story that's already been told when there's so many stories that haven't been told? There's a whole galaxy and a thousand generations of history to explore.

 I'm not saying that it should be a priority but it would be a nice bitch slap to Lucas.

They could do a trilogy between the PT and the OT as well, there are enough years to explore between the ROTS and SW to make something epic about the early years of Vader and the genesis of the rebellion... at least dreaming is free (for now).

I don't think that it would be too hard to re design the PT while keeping all the necessary links for the story to hold up, you just need what GL lost a long time ago... imagination! (AND ALSO YOU NEED THE SW RIGHTS PLUS A HUGE QUANTITY OF MONEY)

luckydube56 said:

AntcuFaalb said:

Anchorhead said:

Yet I'm beyond excited and completely on-board with the seventh film now that Lucas is completely uninvolved.

I am too, but it has less to do with Lucas' lack of involvement for me and more to do with the following image.

 Agree.  Taken straight from the Cantina.  Look at the droid.  Why wouldn't there be a female pirate droid?  Of course there would be.  There is a droid bounty hunter in ESB.  There is definitely a Star Wars look to the whole thing that extends beyond the troopers or the falcon. 

 some original Mos Eisley Cantina aliens, I do get the OT vibe on the new images/trailer! So far I'm going to the first midnight premier screening, let's hope the upcoming trailers keep me in the same path.

moviefreakedmind said:

Now that home TVs are getting so big I think it takes the incentive of sitting in a dingy, crowded, noisy, disgusting, miserable, overpriced, and uncomfortable movie theater away. Now that film is rarely used, there is even less incentive. I can listen to people talk and get coughed on by a 2 year old while watching a movie at home for free.

 Amen brother

I'm sure the movie will be more OT (and hopefully, ST as well) oriented with the story taking place after ROTJ, the best way of dismissing the PT is not even trying to get it right, just ignoring it completely. I'm hoping that the opening scene will be him escaping from the PIT and then the story will take it from there, any historic references of the character must be as OT as they can be and if they can even contradict the PT even better!

Emissary35 said:

Also I noticed when Darth Vadar has his helmet removed an attempt was made to replace his eyebrows that Lucas decided to wax off for the special editions for some unknown reason.  The restoration needs a bit of tweaking to get those brows right, but apart from that the movie is absolutely flawless, and I can't wait for version 2.0.  Thanks so much!

 This will be fixed indeed, according to Harmy.

Well, it’s practically confirmed: The next “Star Wars” anthology movie due in 2018 that recently lost director Josh Trank will be a Boba Fett origin story, confirming one of many rumors that have appeared online in the last several months, TheWrap has learned.’’

Source: http://www.thewrap.com/star-wars-2nd-anthology-film-will-be-boba-fetts-origin-story/

See also:
http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/05/boba-fett-star-wars-spinoff
http://www.slashfilm.com/boba-fett-origin/
http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/436857-the-second-star-wars-anthology-film-is-reportedly-a-boba-fett-movie#/slide/1

Also Josh Trank won’t be directing the film anymore.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3067318/Upcoming-Star-Wars-movie-suffers-early-setback-director-Josh-Trank-announces-s-dropped-high-profile-project.html

A Boba Fett movie is no surprise for me, is one of the top 3 characters I assume would be getting a spin off. My only concern with the spin offs is the consistency across the whole ST/Anthology films, I don’t want to see a magnificent TFA, a bad ‘‘Rogue One’’ then a mediocre episode VIII and a horrific Boba Fett movie. I hope Disney implements QA controls for the entire project.

doubleofive said:

I was looking at the TIE Fighter GOG had up, most of the reviews were complaining it wasn't the CD-ROM Collector's Edition. But now GOG says that is coming, so now I wonder if I can still play it with a mouse and keyboard (with invincibility on, of course).

Tobar said:

Yeah when they first released it, it was the original release. But just this weekend they added the CD-ROM edition and upgraded everyone who had already bought it for free.

I've heard you can now play with controller support as well if you don't own a joystick.

 I'm just waiting on some cash in the card to get the xwing/tie fighter games now that they have the collector's cd edition, that is THE best version for both games.

I played the original CD collectors edition of Tie fighter 16 years ago and finished it with the mouse and keyboard (had no joystick), it may sound a pain in the ass and it was actually, but once you get on track with the learning curve is not that hard. PS: Remove your mouse pad and get some space for the mouse since you'll be doing a loooooooot of huge mouse movements.

darth_ender said:

Hmmm...let us know when the good news is that you guys have remained sober for a while ;)

 I don't drink, just a beer or two every couple of months depending on the occasion, with cannabis that's a different history but I guess that on cannabis you could still argue that you are kind of sober.

DuracellEnergizer said:

I'm drunk off my ass right now.

Yes, yes, I know -- alcholism's a bane on society, and I know all too well from personal experience the strife it brings on others. That being said, the few times I have the opportunity to get inebriated are the one times I feel truly happy (It's an artificial joy, I know, but artificial joy is better than none at all.).

 I'm completely high right now and I feel quite normal, actually I'm at work but I'm not stressed at all. That's a real joy ;)

Neglify said:

Adolfhipster said:

Please invite me, thanks

Ok. I've sent your name and address to the Scientology Mother Church. Agents will be picking you up momentarily. Say goodbye to family, friends and sanity. You're in Scientology now!!

Let me share some comedy among the group

 ''First time I heard the story of Scientology I was like, that is the dumbest shit I have ever heard in my life, it was like: Hey, everybody there’s a space ship coming back, everybody’s getting sneakers, this is Tom Cruise...

And I said that is the dumbest shit I have ever heard, while simultaneously still kind of believing that a woman who never got fucked, had a baby that walked on water, died and came back three days later, so...''
Bill Burr

DrDre said:

To give you an idea how the HD GOUT is created, I will roughly describe the steps to create it.

First a raw super resolution upscale is created with the super resolution script I wrote:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/123952

This raw upscale has the enhanced detail, but also has enhanced grain and unwanted noise. Therefore in the next step the raw upscale is filtered with a non-linear filter I wrote to get rid of the grain and excess noise:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/123956

Some of the detail is removed in this intermediate step, but this can be recovered. By applying the same filter on the Spline64Resize upscale and adding the difference to the filtered super resolution upscale the final result is obtained:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/123957

As you can see below, the final result has the detail of the raw super resolution upscale and the grain and noise structure of the original GOUT:

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/123815

DrDre said:

By tomorrow the first 7-8 min of Star Wars should be finished. I will post the first part here as another sample. The script now takes up so much memory I have to process the movie 10.000-15.000 frames at a time (taking about 48 hours to process). Here's one of the iconic shots from the opening from Star Wars in yet another screenshot comparison ;-):

http://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/124203

Aside from the enhanced detail, it's interesting to note how much brighter the stars are in the super resolution version.

 I just can't believe how well this is looking, great detail and amazing effort to get the best out of the GOUT crappy video. Keep up!

SilverWook said:

It looked like a wrecked Super Stardestroyer to me. The regular SD seen in the opening shot wasn't upside down, and it's bridge tower was intact.

 It is a SSD, before the zooom in you can see the other sets of engines in the background, the one in the intro is a regular SD (there is also a wrecked X-WING on the front)

Looking at all the hype around TFA I don't really think that an HD OOT transfer will be released anytime soon, I do have low expectations of this matter.

2011?

''move along, move along''

Danfun128 said:

Go to jail.

Go directly to jail.

Do not pass Go.

Do not collect $200.

 Sorry

That's why you don't control ''the webz''

darth_ender said:

Gosh, I haven't gotten back to you dclarkg.  It's a shame because you're the passionate atheist I enjoy debating.  It's frustrating with the large comment deleted and now so behind in the discussion, but I'll try to jump on board soon.

 That's ok, these kind of debates require time to be properly discussed and sometimes there isn't enough, the good thing is that the same nature of the discussion allows it to be picked up at anytime and at any point so don't feel obligated to catch up when we can start from scratch without problems ;)

RicOlie_2 said:

The difference between a leap of faith in selling a house and in believing in Christianity is that there is a great loss if the buyer of the house doesn't actually have the money, but no such loss (unless you go all the way and become a hermit, or something) in being a Christian. However, by deciding not to be a Christian because there isn't sufficient evidence (while not seeing any other reason that it isn't true) entails a great loss in the afterlife, whether it's not going to heaven, or spending a long time in purgatory, or not being able to experience heaven in the same way as those who took the leap of faith (it could be any of those--I don't claim to know exactly how God judges).

However, there could well be other reasons for not believing than lack of evidence. I see no need to go into that now, so I'll leave you with that argument for now.

 1- I don't see any good reasons for not believing in Christianity or any other religion in general other than a complete absence of evidence, what else would you need?

2-Of course there is a bigger loss in the house example since the consequences are immediate and we know those are going to be real, but becoming a christian just to play a ''safe side'' in case the whole deal is real looks like fear impulse and not a love impulse, that's precisely another thing I despise of religions because it also uses fear as a motive to sustain it's premises, the fear of god is a primary component of the religious faith because horrific consequences are always presented as a certainty if you don't comply with the dogma. First of all, what kind of all-powefull-loving god blackmails his entire creation with horrendous punishments if we use the free will that himself gave us? Second, why would I be scared of ''holly punishment'' presented in the same book that I don't believe in? If you are an atheist you won't believe in any of the religious propositions, you just don't care what they say.

Warbler said:

No, logically and scientifically speaking, I can't say with 100% certainty that he exists.   But I believe he exists.  I have faith he exists. 

 I quote myself: 'Still not enough for a supreme being that is bigger than the entire existence of everything, the existence of such deity can't be hold on a mere possibility .''

Warbler said:

 yes, I logical conclusion that he doesn't exist, but not a 100% certain one.   You maybe able to say it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt Christ does not exist.  But you can't say it is a 100% certainty.   It is possible(not probable) that he exists.  

I think that is all I have to say on this for now.

 By that rationalization then we can't rule out the existence of pixies, unicorns, trolls, witches, Easter bunnies, tooth fairies and so on because ''is not 100% certain those don't exist'' which puts your entire religion next to those same things with the only difference being the amount of people that believe them as true. You are just choosing one mythological story over the others and wishing very hard that it is real, and despite the fact that you already claimed that is not even probable and that you don't have any evidence you still go trough your everyday decisions, opinions and actions deeply influenced by you taking the bible ''by faith'' as true. It's amazing how can a believer be aware of the slim chances of the existence of something or a claim being true and then just neglect that fact and act like it is true.

You don't go to church, pray to Jesus and follow the bible teachings with such devotion while simultaneously believing that all of that is ''just probable'' at best, somewhere in your brain the ''faith'' has convinced you that all the story is true despite all signs pointing in the opposite direction and that makes sense since ''faith'' is  ''...belief, confidence or trust in a person, object, religion, idea or view despite the absence of proof.''

At least we can conclude that Jesus is on the same level that any other gods, legends, mythic creatures and any super magical mystical beings that we can invent and not ''disproved 100% percent'', also we can conclude that anybody can pick one and just have 'faith'' in it, and finally we can conclude that Jesus is not a reality, just a slim philosophical probability.

I hope you are willing to debate in the future ;)

TV's Frink said:

 Can you say with 100% certainty that he does exist?

C'mon, you know you want to be agnostic too. ;-)

 Yeah, agnosticism is a way better position for a ''I logically conclude that he doesn't exist, but not as a 100% certainty '' argument.

We should take the off-topic section, annex it to Russia and see how it goes under Putin supervision so that should be option 5: Off-topic annexation to Mother Russia.

I'll take option 5, thank you very much.

    Warbler said:

    you forget that the somebody in question is believed to be the son of God.  I think you'd agree that someone who is the son of God could live for over 2000 years.

Sure, the son of god could also appear to all mankind at the same time or at least supply some evidence that he is real and all other religions are just not correct so ''faith'' isn't required anymore.

Warbler said:

dclarkg said

You can say that you have no idea whether I have a million dollars or not but you will never sell me the house based on the possibility of that claim being true, you may say that you don't know but as far as you are concern I don't have a million dollars but a piece of paper saying so. Unless you are willing to sell something to a guy with no evidence of money other than a piece of paper then you can't use the same principle to say the existence of Jesus is real.

I don't use the principle to say that Jesus is real, only that it is possible he is real.

You could use that principle to claim the possibility of anything since the imagination is the only boundary, that is why EVIDENCE is so important since the real world is not made over claims that could be possible because they can't be disproved, you can sustain and abstract claim by a philosophical impasse but that is way different than a proven fact.

    Warbler said:

    that is correct, my decision to believe in God and Christ is a leap of faith.

I really appreciate your honesty here since many believers don't mind to just shut themselves and say that the bible is 100% true and period, at least you are trying a philosophical argument that it may not solve the question but at least it promotes the exchange of ideas.

    Warbler said:

    I don't have to show you any evidence. If I owned the house, it would be my decision of whether or not to sell it to you.   I don't have to prove that you don't have a million dollars before deciding not to sell you the house.

The question was not on you deciding whether to sell or not the house but on me using your ''prove me the non-existence of Jesus'' argument applied to my million dollars.

    Warbler said:

still, I would not sell you the house until it is proven true that you have a million dollars.

That means that you require EVIDENCE on the matter, not a leap of faith.

    Warbler said:

    again, a prosecutor in court can not argue that since the defendant can't prove he is innocent,  he must be guilty.   My lack of evidence of Christ's existence doesn't prove he doesn't exist.

But you know that before a trial can be held an accusation has to be made and the EVIDENCE of the accusation must be presented to the judge and he/she will decide if a trial proceeds based on EVIDENCE.

Also your lack of evidence may not prove that he doesn't exists but the reality of the world we live in has taught us that a claim without evidence is way more likely to be false. I can't say that Jesus doesn't exists 100% for sure and that is only because of the philosophical catch-22 that you propose but I can assure you that is far from being a 50% - 50% chance, even if we say that there is a 50% - 50% chance of Jesus existing still makes it unacceptable for a all-known-all-powerful entity, is just absurd.  

    Warbler said:

    no it doesn't mean that montaurs or unicorns are true, it means they could be.   Something could be true until it is proven it isn't true.

Again, if we use that argument then we could just make up things because ''nothing is known for sure'', basically ANYTHING you can think off automatically has a possibility of existence but we know that can't happen, the possibilities must be tied to the real world and not to abstract philosophical ideas.

    Warbler said:

   then, I guess I can't prove he exists and you can't prove he doesn't.   Which it what I was saying at the start of all this.

    Warbler said:

     I was never trying to prove that Christ existed.  I was only trying show that it is possible that Christ exists.

Still not enough for a supreme being that is bigger than the entire existence of everything, the existence of such deity can't be hold on a mere possibility .

    Warbler said:

    that is because my decision to believe Jesus is real is faith based.   Unless you want to tell me that your to to believe Jesus isn't real is faith based and not logic based, you have to prove your claim(especially when you state it as fact and not opinion or belief. )

I don't just choose not to believe, the logic behind not existing evidence just lead me to a very logic conclusion.

Gogogadget said:

SilverWook said:

Gogogadget said:

Calling George Lucas legendary and saying any of his movies are masterpieces is hilarious, really. Especially if you've seen pretty much any actual masterpieces from actual legendary directors.

 Legendary director Stanley Kubrick was a fan. ;)

“If I made as much money as George Lucas, I would not decide to become a studio mogul. I cannot understand why he doesn’t want to direct films anymore, because American Graffiti and even Star Wars were very good.”

http://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/sight-sound-magazine/polls-surveys/stanley-kubrick-cinephile

That quote actually says a lot about Stanley Kubrick tbh. George Lucas became a studio mogul because it would eventually make him a billionaire. No amount of money would ever not make Stanley Kubrick a filmmaker, it was his entire life up until the day he died.

 If Kubrick had earn the same amount of money than Lucas he would have  spent it in making movies, I'm sure he would have use a few hundred millions in filming the Napoleon film he always wanted... he was truly passionate of movie making.