towne32

Xboxs don’t read burned media. You can thank Microsoft for that move.

Possessed said:

This may be a stupid question, and I’m asking in this thread instead of the empire thread because I didn’t want to rain on its (well deserved) parade. I don’t know much about vfx work, but I’ve always wondered if you kept the project files and separate layers unrendered for a project, if, say, a few years down the line they finally release a better transfer of the films if you could just replace the base file in your editor and have the changes applied to the new transfer without having to do much besides tweak if there’s cropping differences? Sorry if it’s a dumb question but I’ve always wondered that.

If your work was at the appropriate resolution of the new material, it would certainly be usable. But it would not be as simple as updating the source of the main film in your project. As you say, there are cropping differences. So anything that’s overlain will need to be scrutinized closely and adjusted. But you would also need to adjust the color timing, contrast, and potentially grain of all the elements so that they match. That’s still all a lot better than starting from scratch, but you need the right elements to begin with.

Possessed said:

Editroid said:

I believe I noticed compression artifacts when watching it on my TV.

Of course you did, as has been stated multiple times already this is the 7 GB re-encode and a full bd-22 version will be available eventually.

Yep. Fortunately we probably won’t see too many complaints from the facebook crowd about this, as the general public seems to like 700mb 1080p torrents (“V:10/A:10 only complaint file size too big”)

adywan said:

Editroid said:

adywan said:

Editroid said:

Why isn’t there a surround sound mix?

There is. It’s a 5.1 mix

I played it on VLC, and I only see stereo, left, right, and reverse stereo.

Do you have a 5.1 soundcard? If not then vlc will only play it as stereo

Shows fine as 5.1 for me.

snooker said:

3 or so hours until the next teaser image!

Not if you just fanedit the III into a II. Then just do the same for the I and you’ve really reduced your wait time.

snooker said:

towne32 said:

Seems like it’s roughly every 6 hours. What is it that you are saying is very inconsistent about it?

Maybe not very inconsistent, but it’s a half hour to an entire hour off every interval.

I’m probably just reading too deeply into all of this, the hype must be getting to my head.

That would make sense if it was automated. It’s likely just Adywan walking by his computer every once in a while and saying “oh right. I should do that thing.” 😃

snooker said:

Welp, I guess that answers one of my questions.

It might still be a “countdown”, we can’t rule that out yet, however it has been very inconsistent.

I honestly hope that it’s the “ultimate saga trailer” or whatever, can’t wait to be hyped for the next 20 years of my life!

Seems like it’s roughly every 6 hours. What is it that you are saying is very inconsistent about it?

Yeah, tehparadox is done. I’ve read that the owner mysteriously packed up and called it quits. None of the other mods apparently knew who he was or anything. So that’s that.

Daniel Hill (Chris Parsons) has confirmed that all surviving Shada cast members are involved in the new production.

Handman said:

There was something going on with “The Wheel in Space” at some point this year.

Wheel in Space is ‘just’ a recon. They’ve got some of the people from Loose Cannon working on it, as well as the guy who did the Web 3 DVD recon (and tons of the DVD documentaries) working on it, and Mark Ayres restored the audio. It’s the first of a line of recons they intend to produce. At the moment, it’s only confirmed to have a US release via streaming on Britbox. But chances are it’ll just turn out to be similar to Loose Cannon with better sound.

SilverWook said:

towne32 said:

On a completely different note, is anyone looking forward to the upcoming official Shada animation that Daniel Hill has spilled the beans about?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sng_GkIqVFw

Interesting, but they could also be shooting new live action to incorporate into the original footage?

Charles Norton is producing the new release (the Charles mentioned in the video) and he was the animation producer for Power of the Daleks and Stripe for Frazer. It’s definitely going to be an animation, though I can’t say for sure what they’re doing in the video.

Tantive: no word. Anneke supposedly heard something about animation. It could be Shada, but she is also really bad about just repeating things fans say to her. I would speculate that they might do one after Shada, but as it is the same team, it’s unlikely to be made concurrently.

If theyve gone back to employing multiple teams for animations, I would be surprised. Especially for another Troughton one, as Norton’s team now has assets and experience to hopefully save some time and money.

On a completely different note, is anyone looking forward to the upcoming official Shada animation that Daniel Hill has spilled the beans about?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sng_GkIqVFw

moviefreakedmind said:

This isn’t related to emotion but I want to post this in a serious thread. I’ve been having an extremely difficult time remaining standing or even upright for longer than about 2 or 3 hours at a time for a while. I’m young, thin, and pretty well exercised and that’s not to say that I’m the portrait of good health, but that’s to say that there’s no easy explanation for this issue. It’s affecting my ability to do my job, which (obviously) concerns me.

Go see a doctor. Could be anemia and simple blood work will determine that.

Handman said:

towne32 said:

Tantive3+1 said:

Warbler said:

Tantive3+1 said:

Warbler said:

Tantive3+1 said:

just on how regeneration was established.

please elaborate.

Not counting the EU, the classic series established 12 regenerations, no more no less, and then that was the end. While the closest thing a Time Lord could control was their appearance; Night of the Doctor comes along claiming to engineer the Doctor to a “warrior” and that the ninth, tenth, and eleventh incarnations were in name only.

With the 2013 Christmas special, the long awaiting of looking forward to the final thirteenth incarnation where his death would be on Trenzalore, the prophecy of
"the oldest question in the universe would be asked…" (Clara read the book w/ the Doctors name in Journey to the Center of the TARDIS then had flashbacks of it in The Name of the Doctor) with the Silence, and the Doctors future encounter with Lorna Bucket was all thrown in the trash when the BBC made the changes in the 50th anniversary special. It was a sorry excuse of trying to wrap it all up.

Well they kinda had to do something about a timelord having only 12 regenerations. If they did not, the Doctor would eventually die and the show would be over.

The show was supposed to end after 12. The fact that it was going to have an ending is the core reason why people tuned into it especially I. First off, the Meta-Crisis Doctor was not meant to be an actual regeneration because he didn’t change in appearance and the War Doctor was something clearly not thought through enough. Claiming that Matt Smith was the last incarnation and the Time Lord’s surviving and being the one the prophecy was talking about were last minute changes to keep the show going on forever for the BBC’s own selfish agenda’s.

Also, for a show like this that’s going to be going on forever with no series finale end in sight, what’s the point in continuing to watch it? They could’ve easily rebooted the show after it ended.

I don’t think there’s any reason to necessarily stick with something Robert Holmes came up with (12 regenerations) after the show had already been on the air for 13+ years. This is certainly the first time I’ve ever heard a fan say that the core reason (or a reason) they watched the show is that it was going to have an ending or final regeneration. And I, sometimes against my better judgement, regularly talk to fans of all ages (20-65 or so). People generally see this as the show with a formula that allows it to renew itself forever, and continually change and evolve. Suggesting that it’s ‘the show that’s great because it will have an ending’ is a 100% novel idea to me.

In my opinion, Moffat made the first Tennant non-regeneration count towards the total so that he could dispose of the regeneration limit before handing the show over to the next person. After increasing the count with the War Doctor, this would mean that whomever was in charge at the end of Capaldi’s run (Moffat clearly wanted to leave earlier than he did) would be stuck dealing with some dumb rule Robert Holmes came up with. So rather than have his successor deal with it, he included the hand thing as a regeneration and got it over with.

100% this.

And I’m a huuge Robert Holmes fan. He’s easily one of the top writers the show has ever had (post-Space Pirates at least 😉 ). But even so, he doesn’t get to put a final nail in the show’s coffin even if, as I’ve recently learned, some people are watching mainly to see that nail.

Edit: and as further proof that the show is great because it is flexible, the Holmes ‘12 Rule’ itself did retcon a previous episode. The faces that appear in Brain of Morbius were supposed to be previous incarnations of the Doctor (if anyone wants to argue about that, listen to the audio commentary and ‘making of’ on the DVD. It’s pretty indisputable). This would make Peter Davison’s Doctor #13 and the show would then “have to” wrap it up. Instead we pretend they were incarnations of Morbius.

But even if they had stuck with those being the Doctor’s faces, they simply would have written a way out of the 12 regenerations rule. No matter who ended up being in charge when that limit was hit, the question would have been “how do we write our way out of this one?” and not “well what show should we make now that Doctor Who is done?”.

Tantive3+1 said:

Warbler said:

Tantive3+1 said:

Warbler said:

Tantive3+1 said:

just on how regeneration was established.

please elaborate.

Not counting the EU, the classic series established 12 regenerations, no more no less, and then that was the end. While the closest thing a Time Lord could control was their appearance; Night of the Doctor comes along claiming to engineer the Doctor to a “warrior” and that the ninth, tenth, and eleventh incarnations were in name only.

With the 2013 Christmas special, the long awaiting of looking forward to the final thirteenth incarnation where his death would be on Trenzalore, the prophecy of
"the oldest question in the universe would be asked…" (Clara read the book w/ the Doctors name in Journey to the Center of the TARDIS then had flashbacks of it in The Name of the Doctor) with the Silence, and the Doctors future encounter with Lorna Bucket was all thrown in the trash when the BBC made the changes in the 50th anniversary special. It was a sorry excuse of trying to wrap it all up.

Well they kinda had to do something about a timelord having only 12 regenerations. If they did not, the Doctor would eventually die and the show would be over.

The show was supposed to end after 12. The fact that it was going to have an ending is the core reason why people tuned into it especially I. First off, the Meta-Crisis Doctor was not meant to be an actual regeneration because he didn’t change in appearance and the War Doctor was something clearly not thought through enough. Claiming that Matt Smith was the last incarnation and the Time Lord’s surviving and being the one the prophecy was talking about were last minute changes to keep the show going on forever for the BBC’s own selfish agenda’s.

Also, for a show like this that’s going to be going on forever with no series finale end in sight, what’s the point in continuing to watch it? They could’ve easily rebooted the show after it ended.

I don’t think there’s any reason to necessarily stick with something Robert Holmes came up with (12 regenerations) after the show had already been on the air for 13+ years. This is certainly the first time I’ve ever heard a fan say that the core reason (or a reason) they watched the show is that it was going to have an ending or final regeneration. And I, sometimes against my better judgement, regularly talk to fans of all ages (20-65 or so). People generally see this as the show with a formula that allows it to renew itself forever, and continually change and evolve. Suggesting that it’s ‘the show that’s great because it will have an ending’ is a 100% novel idea to me.

In my opinion, Moffat made the first Tennant non-regeneration count towards the total so that he could dispose of the regeneration limit before handing the show over to the next person. After increasing the count with the War Doctor, this would mean that whomever was in charge at the end of Capaldi’s run (Moffat clearly wanted to leave earlier than he did) would be stuck dealing with some dumb rule Robert Holmes came up with. So rather than have his successor deal with it, he included the hand thing as a regeneration and got it over with.

Warbler said:

towne32 said:

Warbler said:

towne32 said:

I’ve seen it suggested that the BBC wouldn’t go for McGann for the 50th, but who knows if that’s true. If anyone is to be blamed for the War Doctor, it’s Chris Eccleston. Though he’s well within his rights to want nothing to do with the show, it’s obviously different than every other actor who has had the role.

I disagree. He knew when he took the part of the Doctor what kind of role he was taking. He knew about the Three Doctors, The Five Doctors, and The Two Doctors. He knew about the legacy surrounding that part. If you are unwilling to take part in anniversary specials, you shouldn’t take the role in the first place. His absence from the 50th anniversary special is glaring.

He’s just an actor in a role. His responsibility is for the length of his contract.

I disagree. For normal roles, that is the case. The Doctor isn’t a normal role. Doctor Who isn’t a normal tv show. There is a legacy surrounding this show and that part. IMO, if you agree to take the role, it is your responsibility to appear in the anniversary specials. You don’t want to do that? Don’t take the role in the first place.

Fans might see it differently, but he is of course not a fan of the show and had a bad experience working on it.

If I am not mistaken, whatever people he had the bad experience with, were probably no longer with show by the time of the 50th anniversary. Btw, just what was the bad experience? Does anyone know?

As highly as we regard it, it is still just a TV show,

It is not a just a TV show, anymore than Star Wars is just a movie. The Fallguy was just a TV show, Falling Down was just a movie. Doctor Who and Star Wars are bit different than that.

He has no moral or contractual obligation. We’d prefer it if he got involved, but he’s not that type of actor. All he gets in return is being many of our least favorite Doctor Who actor. No sleep will be lost.

As far as what happened during his time there, allegedly Phil Collinson was a total dick to a lot of the people on set (lighting crew, etc) and Chris stuck up for them and it caused tension. But who knows. Chris has taken the high road so far and not named names.

I can’t find the interview right now, but I believe there was also one that stated that in Chris’s talks with Steven about returning, he had a condition that he got to choose the director (which had already been settled). Not clear if that was a dealbreaker, as I’m sure Chris didn’t want to do it for plenty of reasons.

Warbler said:

towne32 said:

I’ve seen it suggested that the BBC wouldn’t go for McGann for the 50th, but who knows if that’s true. If anyone is to be blamed for the War Doctor, it’s Chris Eccleston. Though he’s well within his rights to want nothing to do with the show, it’s obviously different than every other actor who has had the role.

I disagree. He knew when he took the part of the Doctor what kind of role he was taking. He knew about the Three Doctors, The Five Doctors, and The Two Doctors. He knew about the legacy surrounding that part. If you are unwilling to take part in anniversary specials, you shouldn’t take the role in the first place. His absence from the 50th anniversary special is glaring.

He’s just an actor in a role. His responsibility is for the length of his contract. Fans might see it differently, but he is of course not a fan of the show and had a bad experience working on it.

As highly as we regard it, it is still just a TV show, and just a job, for many people. I’ll agree that he is not a good fit for the show, even if his performances were fine.

I’ve seen it suggested that the BBC wouldn’t go for McGann for the 50th, but who knows if that’s true. If anyone is to be blamed for the War Doctor, it’s Chris Eccleston. Though he’s well within his rights to want nothing to do with the show, it’s obviously different than every other actor who has had the role.

The War Doctor was well done, even if a bit of a wonky idea in the first place. Steven gave us Night of the Doctor, and I’ll always be happy about that.

He gets a lot of hate, but he stepped in to do this year’s Christmas Special after Chibnall passed on it (Steven was quitting after episode 12). They could have lost their timeslot and never had one again. While I am a fan of Chibnall’s casting decision, this Christmas move has given me some serious doubt about how he’s going to do as showrunner.

Discounting the specials, which would throw a ton of favor towards S7, I would rank the Moffat era series:

5 > 9 > 8 > 10 > 6 > 7.

Coming back from complete death isn’t much a problem given the Master’s history. He has no reason for surviving Planet of Fire. Burned through all of his regenerations by the time of Deadly Assassin. Survived an execution by turning into a space snake. Survived death and cremation via a ring and cult. I’m sure we’ll see the Master again, but I’m always in favor of giving the character long breaks.

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

Just watched the third installment in the trilogy (“Lie of the Land”). Hmmm, the first two were SO good… rather disappointed in the conclusion. Bill’s role in the climax was much too sappy for my taste. Same complaint(s) I had about prior series. Hoping the next episode(s) get back to clever sci-fi stories.

Yeah. A lot of people were a bit ‘meh’ about Pyramid at the End of the World, but I really enjoyed that one. And it made me appreciate Peter Harness’s other two stories quite a bit more (one of which I already liked, and one that I have plenty of misgivings about). His theme of ‘dealing with controversial modern politics by forcing massive quick decisions on humans and seeing how they deal with it’ is interesting. But Lie of the Land was a terrible conclusion. Among the worst episodes of Moffat’s era, and certainly the most disappointing of Capaldi’s.

SilverWook said:

I’m sure this will all be forgotten when Rifftrax does The Five Doctors next month. 😉

I’ll be moving on to whether or not the recons Britbox announces this Friday are any good.

Tobar said:

towne32 said:

And he’s choosing an actress that he has lots of experience working with. The show will survive. And, I think, it will prosper.

For the sake of the series I hope you’re right. I also hope Whittaker can surprise but I doubt it. Her character on Broadchurch left a very bad impression.

Sure, it was a very stressful character. I thought she played it perfectly, though. Similarly, her Black Mirror character was absolutely awful and easy to hate. But again, performance wise she did it right, in my opinion.

No clue how she is going to play this role, but I’m hopeful that she and Chibnall will nail it.

Tobar said:

towne32 said:

I have no problem with people disagreeing with it. Women or otherwise. You can’t always agree with everything, and certainly not on a show that runs for that long. As I’ve said to Warbler before this news even broke, he might not like the next cycle of the show, but maybe he will again some day after that. It’s a show that reflects the era it’s made in. It always has been, always will. I think many of the posts on the other side, today, make you guys look (as you say) like “assholes”. I’m not going to be sweet and comforting in return to inflammatory statements.

The ‘tears’ were specifically regarding responding to the news like a small angry child.

Well I’m glad you’re engaging in good faith. Personally I don’t think they’re doing this for the right reasons and I worry about the ramifications on the future of the series.

Chibnall had certain dealbreakers when he took the job. It’s quite possible that he pushed them further than the BBC was even quite ready to go at that point, which would be exactly the way to do it. And he’s choosing an actress that he has lots of experience working with. The show will survive. And, I think, it will prosper.

Tobar said:

What is your response to all of the women who disagree with this decision? You can’t so readily dismiss them by flinging around accusations of sexism. Nor should you for all of the male fans who disagree with this either.

Maybe you should consider more up to date quotes from the seventh doctor?

a message from Sylvester!
“Congratulations Jodie Whittaker!!! One small step for Women, one Giant leap for Womenkind!!”

How about one from the sixth?

Cannot deny that I am amazed by the ‘never watch it again’ reaction by some viewers ( I hesitate to call them ‘fans’). Very sad

But I’m sure they’re just brainwashed by the femnazis!!!

Tobar said:

towne32 said:

Great casting decision, great tears from the predictables!

Now you see, a response like that makes you and the others who have responded like this sound like assholes.

The Doctor himself wasn’t too keen on the idea:

The Fifth Doctor said:

I have a slight problem with that because it’s not as if genders are interchangeable on Gallifrey. I have no problem with female Time Lords, and my daughter [Georgia Moffett, now married to Tennant] has already whizzed round the galaxy [she played the Doctor’s daughter, created from his DNA, in a 2008 episode]. But I don’t like the idea of the Doctor having a sex change - it’s not as if you would have a female James Bond.

The Seventh Doctor said:

I’m a feminist and recognise there are still glass ceilings in place for many women, but where would we draw the line? A Mr Marple instead of Miss Marple? A Tarzanette?

I’m sorry, but no – Doctor Who is a male character, just like James Bond. If they changed it to be politically correct then it would ruin the dynamics between the doctor and the assistant, which is a popular part of the show.

I support feminism, but I’m not convinced by the cultural need of a female Doctor Who.

What is your response to all of the women who disagree with this decision? You can’t so readily dismiss them by flinging around accusations of sexism. Nor should you for all of the male fans who disagree with this either.

I have no problem with people disagreeing with it. Women or otherwise. You can’t always agree with everything, and certainly not on a show that runs for that long. As I’ve said to Warbler before this news even broke, he might not like the next cycle of the show, but maybe he will again some day after that. It’s a show that reflects the era it’s made in. It always has been, always will. I think many of the posts on the other side, today, make you guys look (as you say) like “assholes”. I’m not going to be sweet and comforting in return to inflammatory statements.

The ‘tears’ were specifically regarding responding to the news like a small angry child.