Back to the Future Trilogy 4K UHD (1985-1990)

[NotASpeckOfCereal]

Originally Posted by lemonski

I’ll tell you exactly how - they’re defacing someone else’s art.

No they aren't. I think if you put your discs in and play them, you'll find the original art has not been changed on your copies. The new copies in the store have not been altered either.

Furthermore, they probably aren't asking anyone to pay money to see this face-swap examples.

Don't go down that road — it's okay that you're not a fan of that kind of work, but this in no way defaces or removes value on the original work.

Chris

[Adam_ME]

Originally Posted by Acer2010

On the 1080p Blu-ray of BACK TO THE FUTURE (1985), the end credits were squished. Hopefully, that won't be the case on the UHD.

Glad I'm not the only one who noticed. Why did they do that? The rest of the picture was fine.

[Nothing371]

There was a new BTTF art print trilogy released an hour ago over at Bottleneckgallery.com if anyone cares.

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by NotASpeckOfCereal

No they aren't. I think if you put your discs in and play them, you'll find the original art has not been changed on your copies. The new copies in the store have not been altered either.

You’ve confused yourself. Art is still art, no matter if I make only one original or a million copies. If I took a chisel to the face of David in the Piazza della Signoria and gave him a twirly mustache, by your logic that would be OK because the original statue hadn’t been altered?

Originally Posted by NotASpeckOfCereal

Furthermore, they probably aren't asking anyone to pay money to see this face-swap examples.

What does that matter? The tagger that spray paints my fence doesn’t charge me either.

Originally Posted by NotASpeckOfCereal

Don't go down that road — it's okay that you're not a fan of that kind of work, but this in no way defaces or removes value on the original work.

I am going down that road. There are people surfing YouTube that weren’t even born in 1985, and have never seen the “original” work. Do they think BTTF is a Robert Downey Jr. film? What about the slap in the face for Michael J Fox and Christopher Lloyd, who put their sweat and craft into their roles only to see themselves replaced with two people who contributed nothing to their art?

The cretins who upload these videos should be asking themselves not “can I do it?” but “should I do it?”. It’s tiresome and infantile.

[NotASpeckOfCereal]

Originally Posted by lemonski

If I took a chisel to the face of David in the Piazza della Signoria and gave him a twirly mustache, by your logic that would be OK because the original statue hadn’t been altered?

Invalid analogy. Nobody took a chisel to the BTTF negs or prints. They altered a small portion of a personal, digital copy.

If you took a digital photo of David (the public version in the piazza is a copy, as you likely know) then put a mustache on it, you would have not affected the values of the original in any way. No reasonable person would be offended by your copy, silly as it is.

Google "alternative mona lisa". You may not like that people have created these versions, but you KNOW that the original is safe.

Back to reality: people are posting these face swap as demonstrations of where the technology is at this point, and they are doing it for a laugh. You should really just chill about it and find something actually significant to direct your outrage at.

Chris

[figrin_dan]

Originally Posted by NotASpeckOfCereal

Back to reality: people are posting these face swap as demonstrations of where the technology is at this point, and they are doing it for a laugh.

I agree with the first bit but I don't believe it's for a laugh. It's going to be used for dodgy purposes in the future and the more people that are aware of it the less people are going to get fooled.

[lemonski]

Originally Posted by NotASpeckOfCereal

Invalid analogy. Nobody took a chisel to the BTTF negs or prints. They altered a small portion of a personal, digital copy.

If you took a digital photo of David (the public version in the piazza is a copy, as you likely know)

You *are* confused. Since you use the word “likely” it’s clear you never understood the analogy in the first place - the whole point *is* that the second statue is a copy and that the art is independent of the replication process.

Originally Posted by NotASpeckOfCereal

then put a mustache on it, you would have not affected the values of the original in any way.

It’s got absolutely nothing to do with values or affecting the original. By altering a copy and presenting it to the world you’re making implied (or possibly intentional) statements about the quality of the original work.

Let’s say you are a popular, successful artist. I take a copy of one of your paintings, get my dog to crap on it, and hang the result in my local gallery. Do you think it’s remotely possible that the artist might take offence? Would he punch my face in if I told him “don’t worry, you’ve still got the original”?

Putting free speech arguments aside, of course the artist doesn’t separate the copy from the original - they’re two representations of the same work.

Originally Posted by NotASpeckOfCereal

Back to reality: people are posting these face swap as demonstrations of where the technology is at this point, and they are doing it for a laugh

It helps if it’s even remotely amusing

[Dsneybuf]

Tom Holland's dedication to the notion of turning Spider-Man into a little Iron Man, instead of trying to stand out among the countless movie superheroes nowadays, made me lose a lot of respect for him, at the risk of sounding petty.

[Bond84]

Originally Posted by martydmc12

All that money and time Universal puts into properties they don't even own, like Harry Potter and The Simpson's, just absolutely amazes me. They have a library of incredibly important films that easily translate into attractions, like E.T., Jaws, Jurassic Park and BTTF. They got rid of E.T. at Universal Hollywood, the Jaws boat ride in Orlando, and all of BTTF. There was even a strong rumor that had not a new Jurassic Park movie had not been made before Jurassic World, Jurassic Park The Ride also would have met it's end. Universal isn't in the "Ride the Movies" business anymore, they're just in the "ride" business, which is really a shame.

Thank you so much for all that info. I can't believe they would even dare to think about scrapping the JP ride. But thankfully they did an excellent job updating it. Seriously, all that work and money to build a Harry Potter land when they could've made an recreation of the Jurassic World park...who know, based on a franchise Universal actually owns.

I miss the old E.T., Jaws, and King Kong rides from my childhood.

[Nothing371]

Originally Posted by Dsneybuf

Tom Holland's dedication to the notion of turning Spider-Man into a little Iron Man, instead of trying to stand out among the countless movie superheroes nowadays, made me lose a lot of respect for him, at the risk of sounding petty.

wtf? Tom Holland didn't write those movies.

[Dsneybuf]

I thought I read somewhere that Tom Holland watched some of Iron Man in slow-motion so he could re-enact it in Spider-Man: Far From Home, even though said re-enactment ended up seeming to undermine any attempt the script might've made to emphasize Spidey's independence (eg, designing his own suit and saving the day with a power that Tony never had).

[emailking]

Originally Posted by r9800pro

Robert Downey Jr and Tom Holland in Back to the future - This is heavy! [ deepfake ] - YouTube

Tom Holland as Marty Mcfly - Back to the future [ deepfake ] - YouTube

In the first clip it looks like Marty to me, not Tom Holland. Doc does not look like Iron Man to me, but doesn't look like Doc either.

In the 2nd clip, it looks like Tom Holland to me, not Marty.

[The Edge]

Originally Posted by martydmc12

Quite simply because it's a franchise Universal can no longer exploit with more movies, therefore making it obsolete to the theme park. I know some Universal executives hated the ride because of that specifically. When I was doing research for the book "Back to the Future: The Ultimate Visual History", I came across an article in the Orlando Sentinel from the mid-to-late 1990's, and an exec complaining that it needed to go even then, because it was based on a dead franchise.

A lot of people were unhappy to see it go, including Ride film director Douglas Trumbull. When I interviewed him for the book, he said he had pitched the idea of Back to the Future... The Ride Part II, hoping Universal might consider doing that, but the studio was hellbent on getting rid of it.

I know the last time I went on it was probably in 2003 or 2004 in Hollywood, and it was already in a lot of disrepair. A lot of upkeep would have be needed for it to stay relevant in terms of tech, and Universal would have had to spend a lot of money and time upgrading it.

I think the saddest thing for me was how Universal absolutely refused to sell off any of the props and signage from the Rides, and had most everything destroyed. I know theme parks aren't crazy about letting the general public be able to own pieces of their attractions, but to pretty much get rid of everything like they did, especially when I know they had offers, a lot of that history and hard work gone forever.



However you can't expect anything different from Universal. When they were installing the MIB ride at Universal Studios Orlando, the tender of Doc's Time Train was destroyed, not by accident, but because it was on the way. Rather than physically move it, it was decided to just scrap it instead. This wasn't just some piece created for the theme park, this was the actual screen-used time train from Back to the Future Part III. The theme park people pretty much destroyed a piece of film history, just because they could.

The engine still resides at the Orlando park, but was almost changed into a Harry Potter train. The persistent rumor is when Universal executives were giving J.K. Rowling a tour of the park, they told her they were going to take the train and change it over into a Harry Potter train, which she wouldn't allow. She also insisted that it be fully restored, which make me believes this story might be true, because the train was eventually moved and put into a better location for display, and was restored, yet the DeLorean was not. Why they would restore the train over the DeLorean gives me reason enough to believe that someone of power intervened.

As to why Universal chose the Simpson's, I do remember in my research and interviews they were also looking at another IP, but I honestly can't remember what it was. I do find is hilarious now that Disney own's Fox, that there's no way Disney is going to allow their biggest theme park competitor keep the license for the Ride when it expires in 2028. All that money and time Universal puts into properties they don't even own, like Harry Potter and The Simpson's, just absolutely amazes me. They have a library of incredibly important films that easily translate into attractions, like E.T., Jaws, Jurassic Park and BTTF. They got rid of E.T. at Universal Hollywood, the Jaws boat ride in Orlando, and all of BTTF. There was even a strong rumor that had not a new Jurassic Park movie had not been made before Jurassic World, Jurassic Park The Ride also would have met it's end. Universal isn't in the "Ride the Movies" business anymore, they're just in the "ride" business, which is really a shame.

When it comes to BTTF, while I agree it was becoming dated and needed a massive refresh, I think they took it away far too soon, and should have waited until 2015, after the 30th Anniversary, which was a big event for the franchise.

I’m going to shorted everything you said here into a single sentence: Universal Studios doesn’t care much about Back to the Future, one of their biggest franchises.

Yeah, they’re giving it some attention this year, but overall, they’ve disrespected it in many ways.

[wildphantom]

Every time I ride that Simpsons ride I feel genuinely sad. The queue and the pre-show - all I’m thinking about is what BTTF was like. Growing up, the ride basically was Universal Studios to me. Of all their great attractions over the years, that is my absolute favourite. With T2-3D a close second - and now that’s gone too

[postmodel]

I understand the sentiment, but we all grew up with this franchise, one that will most likely never go beyond the 3 films from the 80s. How much care should universal give to a franchise that allows for nothing new? At least we are getting them in the latest and greatest format this year. Sorry but it’s totally understandable why they would want to focus on active franchises for a theme park that demands constant updates. I’m glad I have my memories of the BTTF and Jaws rides, but the last time I went on the Jaws ride it was ridiculously lame. I felt either I was too old for it or the ride was just in need of modernization or gotten rid of completely. These franchises don’t really mean the same to kids today unless we help introduce it to them. Plus, it’s safe to say families with young kids probably make up the majority of the clientele. So they need to keep up with them.

Universal was a lot of fun when I went a few years ago. Though I miss the Ghostbusters stuff the most haha. Anyway. Happy Saturday to all and to all Saturday happy.

[nathanddrews]

Originally Posted by nick4Knight

A BTTF reboot would be peak cringe, gladly by the time they both die I'll be even less caring about sacred ideals. BTTF still holds that position as of now... I wouldn't trust any direction it's taken in. Updated. Throwback (ripping off the original). Totally new direction -- I think of like the way Jumanji was taken from a mysterious-edged kids fantasy into a millennial slapstick/cheesy comedy in Welcome to the Jungle.

I liked the formula there... enough... But I couldn't see liking no "updated" Back the to Future treatment

Don't worry - it's not happening. Not ever.

[stvn1974]

How would a reboot even work? The difference between 1985 and the 1950s was drastic, if some teen went back 20-30 years now would there be much to even work with movie wise?

[batman2000]

well the 80s compared to currant day and even the 90s compared to currant day are dated in comparison we now have smart tvs smart phones vr headsets tablets etc. so yeah it could work but it wouldn't be as good as the original it has no chance because it will like most remakes be cheap knock off

[nick4Knight]

I think you could do a TV show of doc and marty adventures. I reckon if you just slapped a comedic bent on it and changed some things around it could be a giant hit. You could even make it so it appealed to a higher intelligence audience. And you definitely want a meme generator of a show in 2020. So it has to appeal there, too.

Now that would be groundbreaking.

[The Edge]

Originally Posted by postmodel

I understand the sentiment, but we all grew up with this franchise, one that will most likely never go beyond the 3 films from the 80s. How much care should universal give to a franchise that allows for nothing new? At least we are getting them in the latest and greatest format this year. Sorry but it’s totally understandable why they would want to focus on active franchises for a theme park that demands constant updates.

If that’s Universal’s excuse, it’s rather weak. I mean, take a look at Disney Parks. It has attractions based on 70-80 year old animated features.