|
Timby posted:As released in 1979, The Motion Picture had the overture. It played over an empty screen. In the Director's Edition, they added the starfield. My bad, I knew they changed something for the DVD, but I thought they added the entire thing.
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 21:53 |
|
|
Dancer in the Dark has the best overture. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkWd0azv3fQ
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Is there any Orson Welles movie that is NOT good-to-great?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
Kart Barfunkel posted:Is there any Orson Welles movie that is NOT good-to-great? Othello kind of left me cold, but it's so drat gorgeously shot. Citizen Kane, The Stranger, Touch of Evil, The Trial, and F for Fake are all among my favorite films, period. The Stranger is Welles slumming it being a for-hire director and he still nails it as both director and actor. I'm really looking forward to the upcoming Criterions of Chimes at Midnight and The Immortal Story, since I have never seen either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
Kart Barfunkel posted:Is there any Orson Welles movie that is NOT good-to-great? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DPW44-I3n4
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 04:39
|
|
|
I was watching Buddha's Palm on Hulu the other day and at the beginning of the movie when they introduce some of the main characters some writing appears under them but it wasn't translated. So what was it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 12:45
|
|
|
Does anyone have a copy of Christine (1983) to hand? I tried to record it onto my DVR last night but we had thunderstorms and it cut out, splitting the file in two, just a couple of minutes in. It was the last showing on the movie channels here for the forseeable future, so I can't just re-record it. The last frame of the first file is this (lovely tablet camera photos inc): And the first frame of the second file is this:  Does anyone know how much is missing? I've never seen it so can't tell. If there's too much missing then I'll just put it on the back burner for a few years I guess, but if it's only like 20 seconds then whatever I'll deal
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
Allyn posted:Does anyone have a copy of Christine (1983) to hand? I tried to record it onto my DVR last night but we had thunderstorms and it cut out, splitting the file in two, just a couple of minutes in. It was the last showing on the movie channels here for the forseeable future, so I can't just re-record it. The last frame of the first file is this (lovely tablet camera photos inc): Can you look at the total length of both files and see how that compares to the length of the film?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
Snak posted:Can you look at the total length of both files and see how that compares to the length of the film? I considered that but it records ads before and after which makes it a hassle to work out, and you have to fast forward at like 6x speed instead of being able to jump near the end to try and work it out. And I'd rather not see the whole thing in fast-forward first 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2016 03:52
|
|
|
That first shot is at the 2 minute mark, the second one is 5 and a half minutes in. You basically missed the rest of the intro showing Christine on the assembly line, the hood closes on a guy's hand while he's inspecting it and then an employee who had ashed his cigar on it is found dead sitting inside. After that it picks up with the other car coming down the road and into the driveway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
Ror posted:That first shot is at the 2 minute mark, the second one is 5 and a half minutes in. Thanks a bunch! I was thinking like 90 seconds would be my limit but hmm it doesn't sound like *too* much... thank god it was early and just setup I guess? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
Allyn posted:Thanks a bunch! I was thinking like 90 seconds would be my limit but hmm it doesn't sound like *too* much... thank god it was early and just setup I guess? That scene and indeed the whole movie is available on YouTube, at varying degrees of quality.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
Not going to spoil block this because if you've seen the trailers for it, you've seen all the bits: In the new Turtles movie, the dimensional portal between the unnamed dimension (that is totally Dimension X) and Earth isn't a huge gaping hole in reality, but a tiny one. As such, the Technodrome is brought in piece-by-piece and automatically assembled here. Is this a a common thing in sci-fi that I've potentially missed, or is it as unique as I think it is? I've wondered about it, and the only thing close to it is the enemy portal in the video game Wing Commander Prophecy, and even that begins with a Big Fuckoff Object making a Big Fuckoff Portal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:
If I'm understanding correctly, Philip K. Dick's The Crack in Space might have a similar idea. A portal to another dimension is discovered—opened up by some faulty piece of machinery, if I remember correctly. They want to colonize this other dimension, but the opening is so small that it'll take an ungodly long time to get a sufficient number of colonists through.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Not going to spoil block this because if you've seen the trailers for it, you've seen all the bits: define "Big". Marvel's Avengers had a portal the size of a football field and that seemed more than sufficient for a big fuckoff invasion, so it's not like you need a big rear end portal. If that still bothers you, just say that it costs a fuckton of resources to open one, so why go bigger than you need?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
MrJacobs posted:define "Big". Marvel's Avengers had a portal the size of a football field and that seemed more than sufficient for a big fuckoff invasion, so it's not like you need a big rear end portal. Yeah, I just imagine it's like pizza dough, every inch you add to the diameter requires pi (no pun intended) more square inches of dough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
MrJacobs posted:define "Big". Marvel's Avengers had a portal the size of a football field and that seemed more than sufficient for a big fuckoff invasion, so it's not like you need a big rear end portal. I don't think it bothers him, he's praising it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
It's not something I would have even thought about. Interdimensional portals asside, having to transport things from one place to another in pieces and assemble them is like, a pretty normal thing. It's used all over fiction. One time Klinger was sending an army jeep back to Toledo, Ohio in separate pieces. It never occured to me that interdimension portals were "giant" by default, since they always seem to be whatever size the plot requires. In fact, I would have guess that they are more often small than large. Like, Stargate sized. Or person-sized. I am kind of curious now though. But I feel like the easiest way to obtain this information would be to go to TVTropes. I don't want to do that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
Portals in scifi are usually just plot shortcuts to get X object to Y position so they're usually exactly as big as they need to be in order for that object to fit through it. The portals in Stargate are used to transport people so they're people sized, the portal in Star Trek Deep Space 9 are used to transport ships so they're ship sized, etc etc.. The writers pretty much never think about changing the portals to be too big or too small unless they've written themselves into a corner where the plot shortcut would wreck their set up. Snowglobe of Doom fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Jun 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
I recently rewatched Candyman (there's a reminder for everyone else to do so) and one thing that I could never grasp was the length of time that passes during the film. I suppose with this sort of film you can always say that's intentional but I would like a general idea of time if there is one, it all felt like it happened in the space of a week or so but the more I think about it the more I feel like much more time should have passed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
Kind of an odd question, but someone might be able to help. I wanted to use a film still to print a very large poster — as close to wall size as I can get. Blu-ray/internet sources probably aren't going to give me a high enough resolution, right? I have access to an industrial printer, was thinking about buying 35mm trailers off eBay and finding a scanner somewhere. morestuff fucked around with this message at 23:58 on Jun 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
morestuff posted:Kind of an odd question, but someone might be able to help. I wanted to use a film still to print a very large poster — as close to wall size as I can get. You could try doing something more artistic and posterizing a still to make it a bit more abstract (it would end up looking kinda like a Mondo poster). I don't know what type of fidelity your industrial printer is capable of either. Edit: This is all a very roundabout way of saying that waiting for the inevitable 4K digital home release will be the easiest option, but you'll still probably need a bit of artistry to make it look good for a wall-sized print. david_a fucked around with this message at 01:35 on Jun 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
david_a posted:To get super-high quality still film scans you have to use a drum scanner, which only specialized shops will have (like this one I just found in a search). Keep in mind they are talking about 35mm still film which has a much larger area than 2.35:1 motion picture film. I have no idea if they would accept motion picture film for legal or technical reasons, nor do I know if a dedicated motion picture film scanning service would do single frames. Even then, from what I can tell most 35mm cinema film is scanned at roughly 4K max, which is a pretty puny resolution to cover a wall with. Thanks, this was very helpful — the drum scanner link shows 35mm sources as maxing out at 26" x 38" print sizes, so that idea is probably out. I should have figured it was a long-shot/dumb.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
morestuff posted:Thanks, this was very helpful — the drum scanner link shows 35mm sources as maxing out at 26" x 38" print sizes, so that idea is probably out. I should have figured it was a long-shot/dumb. A completely different approach would be to project an image on the wall and trace/paint it...
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 02:02
|
|
|
There's a (pay) program you can use called Perfect Resize that lets you resize stuff to a larger size while keeping things sharp. Here's the opening shot of Spartacus (this is the 4k scan Blu Ray):  here is one section, scaled up using 'nearest neighbor' in photoshop:  resized with Photoshop bicubic automatic resizing (which is also decent at scaling things up, but is a little blurry)  resized with Perfect Resize 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 07:22
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:There's a (pay) program you can use called Perfect Resize that lets you resize stuff to a larger size while keeping things sharp. The last one almost looks like stained glass.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:The last one almost looks like stained glass. It looks like the sprite-scaling that they used in Yoshi's Island to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
There are better scalers out there
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 08:46
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:There are better scalers out there like what?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 08:57
|
|
|
Schweinhund posted:like what? Yoshi's Island.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 09:00
|
|
|
Wouldn't you want to make a raster image of it, rather than making it look like SNES9X?
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 10:50
|
|
|
Tbh I like the bicubic scaling better than the "better resize" one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
It depends on how big you're blowing it up. At certain sizes the 2nd one would look like a smudged mess. The third one would look more like a painting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
I just watched Calculator/Titanium/Vychislitel and it struck me that, as a voracious consumer of lovely direct-to-video action movies, I haven't really heard of many Russian ones. Is there a Russian film industry that makes action movies? If not, why? If so, what are some titles I can track down? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfXwrfAm98w
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 16:42
|
|
man
|
dokmo posted:Is there a Russian film industry that makes action movies? Yeah there's some, like Black Lightning/Chornaya Molniya https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9kYdfSroTs Also Spiral/Спираль https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM4klfk7hC4 The 5th Execution/Ключ Саламандры with Rutger Hauer and Michael Madsen plus Russian Jason Statham: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTQFPUxnGrQ There's a few coming up like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeGIa5HO37Y Also Coma: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgWcCyPecDY
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:The 5th Execution/Ключ Саламандры with Rutger Hauer and Michael Madsen plus Russian Jason Statham: Oh god why have I not heard of this. It looks awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
Woah, that Coma movie looks really neat, I love the weirdness and the scale of some of the shots in that trailer. No clue what they're saying, but if the visuals are that good throughout I don't care. Looks a lot like I'd imagine a modern take on roadside picnic with less stalking and more alien weirdness to look like. The Gasmask fucked around with this message at 10:16 on Jun 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 10:13
|
|
|
dokmo posted:Oh god why have I not heard of this. It looks awesome. If you track down a copy and it's lives up to your expectations you should post a "What the poo poo? of the month" thread
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 11:56
|
|
|
Coma looks absolutely like my kind of poo poo. Hyped for some Russian flick!
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 21:53 |
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:If you track down a copy and it's lives up to your expectations you should post a "What the poo poo? of the month" thread I rented it from google play and unfortunately it wasn't stupid enough to be fun, and far too competent to make fun of. The hero is a fat Korean soldier who can't fight well on screen—Fedor Emelianenko, an actual real life fighter, and really the only reason to watch this, doesn't get much to do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2016 13:32
|
|