hairy_hen

In case you haven't noticed, most dialogue in real life isn't actually all that "well-written" . . .

Dear Sir,

I object strongly to the number of objections in this thread.  They are clearly not written by the general public, and are merely included for a cheap laugh.

Yours Sincerely,

William Knickers (deceased)

SilverWook said:

First of an epic trilogy has been a gimmick on the covers of fantasy novels for decades now. I blame that Tolkien guy. ;)

Nah, you can't blame Tolkien for that.  The Lord of the Rings is actually just one very long book, and was intended to have been read as such.

However, it was split into three volumes by the publisher, over Tolkien's objections, due to the cost of paper in post-war Britain.  The only reason they even agreed to publish such a long story in the first place was because The Hobbit had been a success for them years before.

I don't know about the video sources, but I can tell you the audio tracks in the 1989 SWE versions are not the same as the JSC.  The analog-to-digital conversion used for the PCM tracks on the earlier laserdiscs is of lesser quality, with insufficient anti-alias filtering and no dither.  Low levels of digital distortion are present, and the EQ pushes the high frequencies too much, resulting in a somewhat thin sound.

All these characteristics are typical of CD releases from the 80's, since they would have been made using the same type of equipment.

By contrast, the SWE features a more robust EQ and does not seem to have any digital distortion.  It is also somewhat more dynamic, despite being the same mix.  The amount of tape hiss is higher, indicating it may have come from a different analog source; there are also occasional dropouts, and at least one reel seems to have been transferred at the wrong level compared to the others, but overall it definitely sounds better.

These observations were made in the course of GOUT-synching the 35mm mix of ESB for Harmy's DeEd v2.0.  I chose the SWE for the reasons listed above, and did all I could to repair its faults and create a more consistent track throughout.  I haven't heard every laserdisc version out there, but the SWE sounds the best of those transferred by schorman13 for his archive.  So far I've only closely scrutinized ESB and haven't compared the tracks for the other two films, but it seems reasonable to expect them to show similar characteristics.

I'm not sure what other conclusions can be drawn from this information, but hopefully it contributes somewhat to the discussion of differences between versions.

For the sake of preserving an authentic 'feel', the grain level should perceptibly increase on opticals.  It would actually seem false to me if it didn't, knowing what I know of the processes through which the film was made.

Looking at the recent -1 release, it's obvious that the increase in grain during opticals on a projection print was quite huge.  For a source with much less generation loss like Legacy, it will be significantly lower.  But after having filtered it out via difference signal, if you put back in the grain that all your prints have in common (ie, what is on the negative itself), we'll be able to see this type of increase, and it will feel authentic while still looking much better than any version ever shown in theatres.

I absolutely hear what you're saying about doing a film-out, though.  Doing this could unify the entire movie visually and 'glue' it together as one organic, real final product—similar to how some people who mix music 'in the box' like to break out their digital multitracks into the analog world and let them be summed together and mixed down as real electricity, rather than remaining as 1's and 0's the whole time.  If it was me, I would keep the original grain and do a film-out: in this case your digital files are your 'negative', and the print becomes the sort of 'interpositive' which is more final.  (Yes, I understand that's not a perfect metaphor, since interpositives are made using different color and contrast processes, but it holds up reasonably well.)  This could even be scanned back into the computer to maintain a digital record of what the film medium itself did to the image.

Well, that's what I would do, anyway.

Presumably the upconversion is lacking in quality, and the size of the screen is making this easy to perceive.

The solution is to get a Bluray player with excellent quality de-interlacing and scaling built in, and watch your DVD's with that.  It won't make them look like HD, and it can't really improve a bad transfer, but well-encoded discs will be quite watchable.

The usual recommendation is to get an Oppo player, since it is the cheapest way to get first-rate upconversion.  Anything of similar quality from other brands will cost much more.

. . . or what if it was never possible to alter history, and whatever you ended up doing made the future turn out the way it always had?

Nah.  The '97 version of SW has the advantage of being derived from the original 4-track master, with additional changes piled on top of it—meaning that all the parts of the mix that haven't been changed still sound the same as they did back in 1977.

The Bluray audio, on the other hand, is just a spruced up version of the DVD release, which was remixed from scratch and has no resemblance to the original whatsoever.  Even if I didn't hate the way it sounded, I'd never be able to justify using something so completely different and calling it 'despecialized'.

I've given it some thought, and haven't ruled it out entirely, but my current feeling is that it's probably more trouble than it's worth, due to the complexity and sheer number of edits that would be required.  ESB and RotJ would be easier, but despecializing the '97 version of SW would be a fairly gargantuan task.

All early laserdisc releases, including the JSC, are missing many frames at reel changes.

It's enough that you can actually hear some pretty big jump-cuts in the soundtrack, where portions of the audio are simply gone.

The Definitive Collection (and consequently the GOUT, which was derived from it) is the first home video version where this doesn't really happen.

I'm actually fairly certain the GOUT does have more frames than might normally have been seen.  The reason I say this is that if you listen extremely closely, you can actually hear small jump-cuts in the soundtracks where the audio has been looped, in order to extend it in length.  Such a thing would only have been done if the video ended up being slightly longer than the audio, for the sake of maintaining synch.

Without fail, edits of this type occur each time there is a reel change.  Since it happens about every ten to eleven minutes, these would correspond to the shorter reel lengths of a negative or interpositive, rather than the double length of a theatrical print.  These are the same spots where different video transfers go out of synch with each other.

Most of this had to have been done for the Definitive Collection laserdiscs themselves back in 1993, but the GOUT also has a few additional edits of this nature that the laserdisc tracks do not, though for what reason I'm not sure.  Since there can be so much discrepancy in frame counts between versions, even ones derived from the same master, picking one convenient reference and sticking to it—namely, the NTSC version of the GOUT—is the best way to ensure that audio synch issues are eliminated.  I don't especially like the idea of dropping any frames either, but in practice the differences are small enough not to be noticed when watching, and it is still more complete than a typical 35mm print (ie, the -1 version) would have been.

Before doing anything with the DTS, it seems to me it would be helpful to verify whether there are actually any differences from the Bluray audio.  I attended a triple feature screening of all three Batman films at the Cine Capri in Phoenix when The Dark Knight Rises was first released (shown at 2.35:1 aspect ratio), and as far as I could tell, the soundtracks seemed to be exactly the same as what was put on home video.

If the Blurays do indeed use the same audio mixes, as I strongly suspect they do, then there would be little purpose in going to the effort synching and editing together a lossy source when full quality lossless versions are available.

(DTS CD-ROMs are said to have a bitrate of 882 kbps for their five channels of audio—they are good quality for sure, but not as good as real PCM.)

I would be willing to investigate the DTS soundtracks and make the necessary comparisons.  If it turns out that some kind of remixing did take place, we'll chalk it up to the fact that I was sitting off to the side of the extremely crowded theater for the screening.  ;)

Editing to add: I can't speak to the colors with complete authority, but I remember trying to spot any differences and concluding that if any regrading had been done for video release, it was subtle enough that it didn't stand out in a significant way.

If the '97 wampa had been digital, it would have been '97 CGI Jabba level of bad.

Instead, it's merely 'meh'.  It doesn't need to be there, and it also looks nothing like the one from the original version, which creates an irritating visual discontinuity; but overall it's more of a nuisance than something that actually ruins the film.

Of greater concern is the fact that the sound editing done to accommodate the change was very sloppy, resulting in the sound effects going out of synch with the picture.  You can hear Luke cutting himself out of the ice before he is actually seen to do so, and his lightsaber is heard to deactivate even while it obviously remains lit onscreen.

One thing the Team -1 version makes very clear is that the special effects shots were considerably grainier than the rest.  With that in mind, it seems to me that any despecializations should err towards the side of leaving grain in, rather than removing it for the sake of consistency with the Bluray.  With such a good record of the grain levels from shot to shot now available, cleaning them up too much is going to make scrubbed shots feel inauthentic.

I'm not suggesting that it should be left 'as is' from the -1 source—coming from a release print with several generations of duplication, the grain level there is of course going to be higher than it would be if they'd been taken from the same source as the Bluray material, and to jump from pristine to heavy grain and back wouldn't look right.  But for the sake of authenticity, we should still be able to see a significant increase in grain level on any shot that has a blending of elements.  In light of the "overly-DNR'd" remark earlier, I guess what I'm saying is be careful not to overdo it.

To maintain the appearance of an optically-assembled film, I would go a step further and suggest that any shots which were redone for the SE and retained for Despecialized, such as digitally recomposited wipes and so forth, have a layer of grain added over them, as well.  That way, even though they are not actually sourced from the original version, they will appear as if they were.  Otherwise, their sharpness and lack of grain will cause them to stand out as looking 'too good' against all the 35mm material that has been put back into the movie.  Every shot with opticals, even the wipes, should appear softer and grainer than the rest, but if only some of them do, it will feel weirdly inconsistent.

Anyway, something to keep in mind.  I must say I'm very excited to see how this is going to turn out, now that the all the GOUT inserts can finally be replaced!  I eagerly await being able to see the other two films in a similar state of excellence, as well.  Keep up the awesome work.  ;)

Since pretty much all of the things actually in it are rubbish, the concept of 'canon' has become entirely meaningless.

DuracellEnergizer said:

Tack said:

And, personally, I prefer some things in other media to the apparent canonical versions. Like, for instance, I prefer the post-Star Trek III DC comics series to the eventual Star Trek IV.

Same here. I myself prefer DC's take on the post-TOS Mirror Universe over DS9's.

Have you ever considered that DS9's mirror universe may be a mirror universe of the mirror universe?

The fact that you seriously think she intended to kill that guy negates the validity of your entire argument.

If you can't tell it was only intended to scare him, or that the scene itself was played for laughs and not entirely serious, then your entire perception of the world is alarmingly warped, to put it mildly.

*facepalm*

Not only does this thread not manage to stay on topic, it has inexplicably turned into an excuse for bashing Nolan's Batman films.  Since they are actually awesome movies, I declare this thread to be an abysmal failure and shall waste no more time on it.

. . . so anyway, people who aren't prone to hyperbolic paranoia about 'reverse sexism' should definitely give Agent Carter a shot, because it's a fun show about a cool character, and in no way promotes a man-hating agenda.

Speaking as someone who has seen the Hobbit films and is not prone to hyperbolic analogies, I can confirm that they do not, in fact, have any merits at all . . . aside from making it obvious to many that Peter Jackson is full of crap.

That's something I've been aware of for 12 years, but since many were previously deceived as to his abilities, it is gratifying that there is now a much greater awareness of this.  In all likelihood, those who still do not see it simply don't care enough about what Tolkien actually wrote to ever be convinced.  For them, these stories are about something completely different than what their original author intended.

Verily; providing 35mm views of Twi'lek nipples is indeed a public service, since they must be seen in greater than VHS quality to be fully appreciated.  ;)

darth_ender said:

Also, and here I give a SPOILER WARNING, but as I wrap up the fourth book, I can't help but take issue with the clever plot.  Yes, it is clever how Barty Jr. tricks Harry into grabbing the portkey and teleporting right into Voldemort's clutches, but I ask myself, if that's really all it would take, why didn't he simply turn a pencil in Harry's backpack into a portkey?  It would have saved time and been just as effective.

Yes, technically he could have done that, but Voldemort's aim was to make a dramatic and grand re-entrance to the wizarding world, by killing 'The Boy Who Lived' after having abducted him in a startling and public manner from under the noses of everyone who believed he had power over the dark lord.  Had he been successful in doing so, he would have been able to announce his return with the death of his perceived nemesis, and immediately terrified everyone who had ever feared him all over again.

As for the issue of books vs films, speaking as someone who began with the books back in 2000 and was utterly enthralled by them, the Harry Potter series is one best experienced in written form, both for completeness and for storytelling style.  The only exception is the final story, Deathly Hallows, which at times is a bit dull and is actually improved upon by its film adaptation.

I watched The Thin Man on December 31, starting at 11 pm.  Since it is an hour and a half in length, I was still watching it when midnight came around, so technically it is the first film I've seen this year.

First movie begun completely this year is going to be Inception.

For tv, I just finished season 1 of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.  First new show will be Agent Carter.

The isolated score can't really be said to be 'incorrect', because its aim was to reproduce the music as originally composed by John Williams, not the edited version that is actually heard in the film itself.

There are numerous differences, mainly in terms of things having been left out of the final cut so that certain scenes would be unscored, even though Williams had initially written music for them.  It's actually quite a lot of fun to watch Empire with the full score running in synch.

A new version of RotJ in 5.1 with fully corrected GOUT-synch is in the works and will be completed by the time v2.0 of the Despecialized Edition comes out.