"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The problem is that people are too concerned with putting their own stamp on something or "making it their own", than making it right.

Are they? Or are they concerned with being able to present their story ideas, which may be incompatible with some details of existing continuity? Until I see it, I'm not going to assume the changes are ego/power-trip driven and will expect they have a storytelling purpose until proven otherwise- just like Nick Meyer's changes when he took over Star Trek 2.

Of course, it may be some time before I do see it as, from the trailer, it looks to me more POS than TOS.

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Enterprise did one thing right: they took today's technology and put it on a path that pointed toward the TOS look in form and function, but taking into account things they never could in the 1960s.

That may be the ONLY thing they did right. The show sucked, and I'm a big Star Trek fan of ALL of the different incarnations (except Enterprise).

[Doctorossi]

Jeff, it's interesting to me that you make the comparison to the new Doctor Who. I'm a big-time Who fan and one of my larger issues with the new series is one probably not voiced very often: the budget's too high.

I'm not being facetious and I'm not being nostalgic for rickety sets, foam monsters and mis-keyed video effects. The problem is that, with it's miniscule budget, the old show couldn't really afford to rely on visual storytelling very much and had to entertain on the quality of writing. The product might have more in common with a stage production or a radio show, in that sense, but that's the way it was and, to me at least, it was very refreshingly different for it from stuff like Star Trek. The show moved at a slower pace and allowed for story and character exploration, mood and tension building and just a bit of healthy philosophizing. Today, you get cliches, pop culture touchstones, chase scenes and soundbite characterization. The show's visual-storytelling allowance has made room for very weak and sloppy writing and writing is what I always came to Who for.

I'm suspicious that Abrams' approach to Star Trek may mirror this effect a bit. While Star Trek was never the ponderous, dialogue-y, slow-burn show Doctor Who was, it (especially TOS) had budgetary limitations, as well, which helped to dictate a story-driven style. From the trailer (I know, not the best source to judge by), Abrams' movie looks like an off-the-rails action, VFX eye-candy "thrill ride" (in my experience, a descriptor usually applied to movies about as unthrilling as the medium can get). I don't know if this monetary freedom is an affliction ailing this new movie, but just for fun, I'd certainly love to see a TOS-style movie made on a strict budget of $50 million or so!

[Eternal_Sunshine]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Phillps's 21:9 TV is $5000. Anyone who's got 5k to drop on a TV has got an extra grand or 2 for a projector and an anamorphic lens.

Jeff, I only included a link to the 21:9 LCD TV because Philips apparently saw this new product as making it necessary to develop a matching Blu-ray player, the BDP9100, that hopefully will be able to move the subs into the picture area. I'd rather get a new BD player from Sony or Panasonic with the same abilities, though...

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

you, uh, nailed it... I came here to talk about your corpus cavernosum muscle (edit – mine).

Where’s Esox (with 1 “s”)?
He should be able to provide an appropriate quote from Braveheart (the scene when they’re in the forest, planning).

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by GabrielB

And I guess this DNR issue is even greater than we had anticipated (us the not-in-the-know). If they change their politics regarding DNR, we could assume it won't just affect Blu-Ray but also how they handle their master department, etc. I guess this is why it's also taking them so much time incorporating this new philosophy...

(And to get decisions approved in this gigantic corporation (WB) must be something with all the levels of authority they must have...)

It’s worse than that, i.e. "getting decisions approved". Sometimes the people who are ‘in authority’, if in fact anyone is ‘in authority’ appear to be completely inaccessible without one jumping through multiple contact hoops.

For instance, a few weeks ago, Torsten PM’ed me because he was having some difficulty in contacting the ‘right’ person in Burbank in regards to his company (http://www.tle-films.com/) having a title coming out on Blu-ray that is due to hit the stores in the U.S. in a few months. In that regard, in its current condition, this would not be a good idea at all as something is wrong with the captured file or the encode.
Keep in mind, this is a professional (Torsten) who is actively working in the industry and can’t make a basic connection with a major studio in order to provide input to help them out and eventually provide a service to home theater enthusiasts who are fans of the film.

Every time I think of the way Amadeus looks on Blu-ray and where it is located on AFI’s Top 100 List, I truly grind my teeth.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

It's more of a statement buy for people right now, but give it a while, once all of the big manufacturers start making them, and 7:3 will take more of the LCD market than CIH setup has of the front projector market. Mainly because it is the right ratio out of the box and doesn't require any extra buys, plus it comes in more PAL friendly sizes...

Max, I certainly love your choice of icon picture thingees.

[horseflesh]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Max, I certainly love your choice of icon picture thingees.

Yesterday's was much better

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by horseflesh

Yesterday's was much better

Seriously?! Better than that? Ok. Me gotta see.

Max, who is that in your avatar?


See, Penton, who cares about Angelina Jolie when there are "icon picture thingees" like that in the world?

Lie back and think of England, indeed!

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

It's more of a statement buy for people right now, but give it a while, once all of the big manufacturers start making them, and 7:3 will take more of the LCD market than CIH setup has of the front projector market. Mainly because it is the right ratio out of the box and doesn't require any extra buys, plus it comes in more PAL friendly sizes...

WHo is the women in your avatar?

[Bizi Jones]

its Keely Hazel

[Doctorossi]

Thank you, Bizi.

[cjamescook]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

That'd likely put your proposal at that gorgeous Italian piazza. Are you that romantic?

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Hopelessly...

So, you are a fan of Italian architecture, piazzas, and asset management. Perhaps, then, this is also on topic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqvzl7WJmKc

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Bizi Jones

its Keely Hazel

I prefer Lucy Pinder. :-)

[Jeff Kleist]

For all you resolution junkies, the new Red Dwarf specials are all being shot at 4k. It's the RED camera, so it's probably not a good reference, but I believe that makes it the first TV show to have a 4k pipe (though I really wonder if the FX will be done at anything over 2)

http://www.reddwarf.co.uk/news/2009/02/13/red-through

I'm not being facetious and I'm not being nostalgic for rickety sets, foam monsters and mis-keyed video effects. The problem is that, with it's miniscule budget, the old show couldn't really afford to rely on visual storytelling very much and had to entertain on the quality of writing. The product might have more in common with a stage production or a radio show, in that sense, but that's the way it was and, to me at least, it was very refreshingly different for it from stuff like Star Trek. The show moved at a slower pace and allowed for story and character exploration, mood and tension building and just a bit of healthy philosophizing. Today, you get cliches, pop culture touchstones, chase scenes and soundbite characterization. The show's visual-storytelling allowance has made room for very weak and sloppy writing and writing is what I always came to Who for.

As is typical, the problem is in the WRITING, not the concept or the budget. Now that Moffat has taken over, and given his almost universally excellent episodes, I expect to see a better balance of elements. It's true that big budgets enable writers to be lazy, but they'll be lazy no matter how much or little you have. They were also pushing out far less material back in those days. (1-2 sets of 8 half hours a year?) and could afford to take their time. I still can't figure out why it takes them 9 months to shoot 14 episodes when we can do 22-24 in the same amount of time here.

You're not kidding on the budget on TOS. ST:TOS won some kind of award, might have been an emmy due to Matt Jeffries' revolutionary use of spray foam to construct sets. They kept cutting his set budget so he'd go out with the chicken wire, sculpt it, hose it and paint it

[Knight-Errant]

In it's heyday the old Doctor Who would be 6 or more 4-6 part serials a year. They never had much time to do it. The first two Doctors in particular hardly had holidays, year round and would perform the episodes almost as live with a bare minimum of editing due to the state of videotape production and editing back then. It's amazing to look back at.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by cjamescook

So, you are a fan of Italian architecture, piazzas, and asset management. Perhaps, then, this is also on topic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqvzl7WJmKc

lol, you’ve got to love the kid watching the casualties who is sitting on the steps…..just smiling.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

For all you resolution junkies, the new Red Dwarf specials are all being shot at 4k. It's the RED camera, so it's probably not a good reference, but I believe that makes it the first TV show to have a 4k pipe.......

Apparently, the remaining episodes of ER (starting with last night’s episode which already aired) were all shot on the Red camera.
Given the compression from your satellite or cable provider, I highly doubt that anyone will notice any resolution difference compared to the 35mm. pipeline used with all other ER episodes from the last…..what is it, 10 -15 years?

Especially, given the fact that as I mentioned before, Hancock was scanned at 4k for the DI (which is a higher rez source than the effective resolution of the Red One-- which is about 3.2k), and I don’t recall any reviewers or members doing somersaults over Hancock’s picture quality compared to any other Blu-rays they’ve watched.

Oh well…we’ll see how folks respond to The Da Vinci Code when it debuts on Blu-ray,
https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.php?id=159
as that’s another one of those rare Super35 birds that actually received a 4k DI during post, from which the HD master for the Blu-ray was sourced.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

As is typical, the problem is in the WRITING, not the concept or the budget.

When you don't have any budget, you can't rely on the budget.

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Now that Moffat has taken over, and given his almost universally excellent episodes, I expect to see a better balance of elements.

Me, too. I can't wait for Moffat to start.

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

They were also pushing out far less material back in those days. (1-2 sets of 8 half hours a year?) and could afford to take their time.

Which days? The first few years of the show, they only took a couple months off a year (from broadcast, that is); the workload was monstrous.

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

You're not kidding on the budget on TOS.

It was indeed low, but during Star Trek's original broadcast years, the budget of an entire Doctor Who season was less than that of one Star Trek episode.

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Especially, given the fact that as I mentioned before, Hancock was scanned at 4k for the DI (which is a higher rez source than the effective resolution of the Red One-- which is about 3.2k), and I don’t recall any reviewers or members doing somersaults over Hancock’s picture quality compared to any other Blu-rays they’ve watched.

Most reviewers did not like the stylized look of Hancock. It looked as if there was a problem with the lower IRE's getting lost somewhere in the production pipeline but of course the deep blacks and oversaturated colors can also have been an artistic choice and this is something that I do not to argue but a lot of reviewers do. With regard to resolution and the visibility and realism with which grain is reproduced Hancock is reference material. I show it to people sometimes to demonstrate that grain properly reproduced is not a problem - it looks nice and gives the picture texture.