Search results

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.

I gotta admit I don't think the movie holds up especially well. I'd not seen it since I reviewed the DVD decades ago. I liked it a lot then but now... meh. And that's not because some elements - misogyny, racism - haven't aged well. Those were always problematic. It's just less exciting and...

I viewed PT and OT as "whole entities".

Accidentally bought 2 of these so rather than return the extra, I figured I'd see if someone here wants it. Brand-new and sealed! $13 shipped!

The 2004 "AvP" is largely a snore. It comes to life on occasion but most of it's :emoji_sleeping:

Would "Solo" and "Rogue One" count for the "Star Wars" series? They take place between the PT and the OT.

No, but I don't think a new movie is 100% beholden to the prior films. And maybe these huggers have evolved. They could chase and scamper - perhaps these specimens have just taken it to the next level.

100%. The grain gave the movie a sense of verisimilitude that's gone now that it's all shiny 'n' peppy.

I don't think anyone has argued that no grain reduction is ever allowable/appropriate. Just that it be tasteful and still allow a gritty, grainy movie from 1986 to look like a gritty, grainy movie from 1986, not a peppy shiny film from 1986. Cameron may've hated the graininess of "Aliens" but...

Okay. I watched it. It looks all smooth 'n' shiny and not like a movie from 1986. Degrained to the point of sterilization.

Do I like what they did to the movie in this squeaky-clean-n-polished image? Nope. But damn, do I love this movie. I don't think I'd watched it since the 30th anniversary BD and I almost forgot how much I adore it. "Aliens" is a prime contender for my all-time favorite movie, and it still...

That seemed to be what studios did in the infancy of 4K discs. They had crazy bright UHD. They tamed it after a while to much more appropriate levels. But I guess some people want Nuclear HDR.

Sure, though the uproar about "French Connection" on BD was related to the colors. I think the dialogue change has only impacted streaming and not a BD release. Point remains: people used to get upset with tinkering down to home video releases. I mean, this goes back to "The Matrix" on DVD...

Yup. And people went nuts about how Lucas "reimagined" all the "Star Wars" films. People always get upset when filmmakers change colors for these releases. I really don't understand why Cameron's "reimagining" is A-OK when all the others got lambasted.

Despite how I might appear at times ;), I'm not delusional. I don't think Cameron - or Lucas, or whoever - will see my posts and say "that weirdo's right!" :D They want what they want and that's their right. But it remains my right to bitch and moan about it! :D And to be clear: I've not yet...

:laugh: Yeah, as mentioned, I saw "Wish" theatrically and didn't think much of it - I don't feel it's a terrible movie but it was meh at best. The "Disney completist thing" runs strong in me, though! :)