B-ROLL
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2016
- Messages
- 5,038
- Real Name
- Bryan
I'm pretty sure Mr. Coppola would never do it Gungan Style !Nah - use Jar Jar Binks instead!
I'm pretty sure Mr. Coppola would never do it Gungan Style !Nah - use Jar Jar Binks instead!
They did something similar to create the 1080P version of Star Trek: The Next Generation. It was shot on film and completed in post-production on tape. I think they found all but 8 seconds of material for the entire series.”.....restoration team began by searching for over 50 original takes to replace lower resolution opticals in the original negative....”
talk about going the extra mile.
This all sounds very Depp State !Hate to be snarky, but pretty sure that wouldn't be an upgrade.
Again, I think it's a mediocre movie and even great directors produce mediocre movies.Sure, but it doesn't make sense to compare a Coppola movie to something from an obviously inferior filmmaker.
We know FFC once was a great filmmaker. Comparisons to his good movies makes "GF 3" look bad...
IIRC Coppola didn't get out of the red created by One From The Heart until the release of Dracula.I can only hope that Coppola's doing it for the money (that or he has a lot of free time on his hands), because that is the only way I could see him doing a remastered version of "The Godfather Saga" or the "Godfather 1901-1980" version that was released on VHS in the 90s. He reportedly only did the "Saga" to raise more money for "Apocalypse Now", and given the state he was in financially in the 90s it wouldn't surprise me if Coppola did "1901-1980" for the money, too.
They make some terrible movies, too.Again, I think it's a mediocre movie and even great directors produce mediocre movies.
No doubt, but IMO, Godfather III isn’t a terrible movie. Others have expressed otherwise which I’m fine with people disagreeing with me. We all have opinions.They make some terrible movies, too.
Again, I think it's a mediocre movie and even great directors produce mediocre movies.
Does this affect the mono and 5.1 track? I only watch the mono, but heard the 5.1 theatrically. That track has music playing in the wrong spot. After the assassination attempt on Michael's home, he shouts "Rocco, alive!" and the music is supposed to punctuate that, but it's out of sync at this point.Also hoping that a future release of part II will restore the missing 10 second chord of the end title music.
Replace not only Sophia with Winnona but get rid of George Hamilton as well. The 2 biggest mistakes. Just goes to show what the wrong casting can do to a film. Music as well. Think about how the wrong composer and score destroyed Never Say Never Again!
I offered my opinion, just as you do. For ME, I don't understand how people can defend this film. They do, clearly, but I don't understand it. Nothing to do with kind and tolerant and everything to do with the fact that I saw the film just before it came out and thought it terrible and as disappointing as disappointing can be. I was not alone in feeling this - the entire industry audience I saw it with felt this way and you could feel it all during the screening. And some of the reviews, as you know, were hardly kind and/or tolerant, even the ones that thought they should like it but couldn't hide the disappointment, like Ebert. It's all good - everyone can buy it and be happy, and those who don't care for the film won't. I've tried to like it over the years - I've bought every new attempt - but I'm done.
Does this affect the mono and 5.1 track? I only watch the mono, but heard the 5.1 theatrically. That track has music playing in the wrong spot. After the assassination attempt on Michael's home, he shouts "Rocco, alive!" and the music is supposed to punctuate that, but it's out of sync at this point.
And we have Connery to thank for that. Apparently, the producers wanted James Horner, but Connery insisted on Legrand.I certainly concur with your feelings about the awful score for NSNA...probably the worst score Legrand ever wrote. The title song (by Lana Hall, for a time married to Herb Alpert and a lead singer for Sergio Mendes and Brazil '66) is simply awful to my mind, and nothing that comes after improves on it.
Hate to be snarky, but pretty sure that wouldn't be an upgrade.
I just can't accept that the Michael of "GF 3" is the same guy as in the earlier movies...
This is the crux of the problem with GFIII. At the end of GFII, Michael has lost his soul, completely, which means that what he has done--paradoxically killing his brother Fredo for the sake of "the family"--is irredeemable.
So GFIII is all about his attempted redemption, but to accept the premise means you retrospectively diminish the tragic depth of the first two films.
GFIII's Michael also just seemed like a different person from the previous films--playful, witty, more "human." But GFIII doesn't show us how he went from the soulless, hollowed-out GFII monster to this new person craving redemption. It was a jarring experience to watch.
This is the crux of the problem with GFIII. At the end of GFII, Michael has lost his soul, completely, which means that what he has done--paradoxically killing his brother Fredo for the sake of "the family"--is irredeemable.
So GFIII is all about his attempted redemption, but to accept the premise means you retrospectively diminish the tragic depth of the first two films.