Recent content by Colin Jacobson

SOLD! Sorry I didn't update earlier!

I'm bailing on this bananas thread and any discussion of these recent Cameron movies. Have fun without me. I'm done so anyone who wants to insult me, discredit what I said or claim they know my thoughts and intentions... party on, Garth.

Enough already.

You're the one who accused me of anger and outrage.

You're seeing "potshots" that don't exist.

And I do give JC credit for not Doin' a Lucas and revamping the movies in that way. It must kill him to leave some of those "Abyss" effects shots untouched - the pseudopod, the wave - but he did, as far as I can tell.

Exactly. The only thing that makes "MFL" stand "above" "Aliens" is its BP award. Same with plenty of other movies. And I like "MFL"! It's a well-made movie. But it's undeniably a trifle. It's a romantic comedy and totally lightweight. Plenty of movies that seem viewed commonly as "art"...

Precisely. There's no objective way to decide what's "art" and what's just "entertainment". Would "LOTR: Return of the King" be "art" because it won Best Picture but the prior 2 movies not because they didn't? Objectively, all movies should get the same level of respect in terms of how...

I strongly disagree with this idea that some films are untouchable and others can be mucked with however someone wishes. One man's trash = another's treasure and whatnot. IMO, "Aliens" is art. It's about as good an action movie as one can imagine, and it deserves to be treated with the same...

I don't think anyone claims that we want movies to replicate problematic theatrical experiences. Is this really the bar we want to set?

It's about not using means to manipulate the source - ie, changed colors, added "sharpness", removing all grain, etc.

Since I've been accused of anger, I'll point out I'm not mad. I'm disappointed and unhappy, but I'm not a churning ball of rage. Weird to me that "I don't like what was done to these movies" somehow has been painted as "I'm blind with violent, uncontrollable fury" in these discussions.

What "potshots"? I said I don't get why so many are rationalizing the modifications made to these releases - and I don't, not on the HTF. That's not vaguely a "potshot".

I think it was the 1993 "Abyss" SE to which he included the controversial endorsement of its 1.33:1 version over its 2.35:1 presentation. IIRC, his point was that due to the low resolution of NTSC, 1.33:1 was the way to go, and he obviously felt that he framed the movie in a way that it didn't...

Same here. Seems to me the HTF has been about accurate representations of films as intended when released. I honestly don't get why so many here have bent over backwards to give Cameron a pass on these.