Colin Jacobson
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2000
- Messages
- 13,328
I was born at night, but not last night.
You're seeing "potshots" that don't exist.
I was born at night, but not last night.
I'm not but I'm fine if you want to deny it.You're seeing "potshots" that don't exist.
Your use of “I’m blind with violent, uncontrollable fury” is just wrong.
I'm not but I'm fine if you want to deny it.
Then you should have quoted me instead of Travis. Furthermore, I never accused you of being violent or having uncontrollable anger as you're now embellishing my words.You're the one who accused me of anger and outrage.
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.
Actually, Aliens is an Oscar winner, it won two Oscars, as we all know. Not best picture, though.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 respect as any Oscar winner you wanna name.
Please don't, you're a voice of reason in this thread, and despite the occasional disagreements, I think this is one of the more interesting threads in recent times.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.
I also don't agree with the food analogy. Every meal is its own thing, and someone can make infinite versions of any recipe, including replicating it or mot. A film is unique and can't really be replicated. So changing a film would be like changing a meal forever and the previous version is gone forever. That obviously doesn't happen.
Neither does the classical music analogy work because it still has the sheet music and that is all that is used. It would be analogous to changing the sheet music and no one would agree with that.
This is more akin to removing brush strokes on paintings in restorations. Anyone with any semblence of respect to art should be horrified at that. Film is art and no different.
And The Abyss won Best visual effects and was nominated for Best Cinematography... but which cinematography exactly ?Please don't, you're a voice of reason in this thread, and despite the occasional disagreements, I think this is one of the more interesting threads in recent times.
Do stay and contribute.
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.
The fundamental difference is one of unique vs not unique. A specific rendition of a classical piece is unique, the underlying sheet music used is the same between them. A specific meal is unique, but can be replicated and altered at will. A non authentic version of some meal doesn't remove the authentic one from existence. Neither does a different rendition of a piece of classical music. A film is its own thing so changing it and not preventing other transfers from being shown is exactly the problem. If all were available, no one would complain. Lucas, Wong Kar Wai, Jackson, Coen Brothers, Cameron, can make all the changes they want as long as the original is kept intact. So I don't think the analogy works at all.You may disagree, but that's not how many foodies feel, LOL. Not saying it's exactly the same thing of course, but the general notion of purism/authenticity still holds. Also, cuisines and food traditions have been around far far longer than motion pictures. Give films another several centuries and film presentation and appreciation may indeed resemble that for food a good deal more (clearly).
Well, the OCN and/or answer print and/or well preserved IP is (very often or usually) still around... just as the original sheet music (most of the time). The main diff is we don't generally get nearly as many options w/ movie presentations as w/ classical music. But again, part of that is simply because music has been around far longer than movies and (most) individual pieces of music are not as costly (in multiple respects) to present and enjoy, so the practices have had much more opportunity to vary.
But consider silent films though... as they were typically presented w/ music that aren't perfectly replicated, if at all, especially today. Also, the exact (monochrome) toning and thus image presentation of many silent films may well be debated.
Anyway, sure, both analogies do not perfectly correspond to the motion picture, but they don't need to be perfect in every respect to speak meaningfully and substantively on this topic. And I'm not saying we shouldn't care what Cameron does w/ his films anyhow -- I already said multiple times I don't like what he's done -- but simply trying to put all this in perspective given the larger, evolving (cultural and artistic) context that might be helpful...
_Man_
The fundamental difference is one of unique vs not unique. A specific rendition of a classical piece is unique, the underlying sheet music used is the same between them. A specific meal is unique, but can be replicated and altered at will. A non authentic version of some meal doesn't remove the authentic one from existence. Neither does a different rendition of a piece of classical music. A film is its own thing so changing it and not preventing other transfers from being shown is exactly the problem. If all were available, no one would complain. Lucas, Wong Kar Wai, Jackson, Coen Brothers, Cameron, can make all the changes they want as long as the original is kept intact. So I don't think the analogy works at all.
With music in silent films or colour temperature, since there is no right or wrong, people tend to be much more lenient here, as I've pointed out above for the latter.
I mean it is true, especially things like director's cuts. I can't say what happens in the future, but for now I think if you are releasing something and you don't make (crucially) an original version available, you are doing a disservice to film preservation. Maybe the original cuts of star wars will someday be released but it's hard to say from this vantage point. But we know Lucas' attitude and that's the problem. I just still think there is much more unique to a film than a meal.Actually, your argument is untrue. There are already multiple (typically slightly different) versions of many films released over the years. And I also already pointed out why there are fewer different options so far... but that might not always be so, particularly if we allow the motion picture situation to evolve for another century or more, especially w/ the advent/trend of tech.
We actually don't know that there won't ever be more revised versions of True Lies in the future for instance. We are currently very limited in timeframe to see/know in large part because wide releases/availability of films beyond the theatrical experience has still actually been quite relatively short. This whole sell-through media bizz has only been some 40 or so years old afterall...
_Man_
I watched the Abyss for the first time ever with the UHD BD extended version. I really enjoyed it until the ending. Major WTF at the end. Still wondering how and why this happened.Well, I wish JC would indeed pull a Lucas (sorta) while he's at this and give us a much better ending to The Abyss, LOL -- that ending, especially in the SE, is truly awful... and I don't just mean the crappy FX, LOL... so if we're getting an alternate, preferred SE anyway, might as well give us a (substantially) better ending.
_Man_
That’s basically been the reaction to the ending since it came out.I watched the Abyss for the first time ever with the UHD BD extended version. I really enjoyed it until the ending. Major WTF at the end. Still wondering how and why this happened.