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

[Penton-Man]

Jeff K., I just read Bill's review -
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/review...ews032310.html

I enjoyed the parts in yellow.
lol, Go get 'em Bill.

[Jeff Kleist]

Glad you liked it

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Denon CI, if you can't make it NAB,- check it out at home or your local establishment which does have access.........

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...-3d-2010-3.DTL

I'll be in Pomona on Wednesday so I'll miss the Par 3 tournament (AKA "The Kiss of Death" tournament, since no past winner has ever gone on to win the big event). I hate when work gets in the way of fun

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Jeff K., I just read Bill's review -
http://www.thedigitalbits.com/review...ews032310.html

I enjoyed the parts in yellow.
lol, Go get 'em Bill.

I agree with Bill 100%.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

I'll be in Pomona on Wednesday so I'll miss the Par 3 tournament (AKA "The Kiss of Death" tournament, since no past winner has ever gone on to win the big event). I hate when work gets in the way of fun

lol, what do you do Denon, drag race on the side, when you're not playing golf?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

I agree with Bill 100%.

Well, whether you’re in the pro or anti camp regarding potential picture quality issues of this Blu-ray set, I think it was quite poor judgment on the part of the content provider in Burbank to single out this forum and ask that the screenshots of the Trilogy be removed from Ken Brown’s review.

Granted, Blu-ray.com is now probably the world leader in terms of discussing and debating things specifically regarding Blu-ray, but that was quite a bold move. When I first heard about ‘the intervention’, it reminded me of a famous line spoken by Randy Quaid in Days of Thunder concerning a monkey and a football as to who made that call.

The perception among just about everyone is that smacks of interfering with the review and the reviewer, or subtle tampering.

I mean what’s next?.... if the Blu-ray.com reviewers’ don’t give high enough scores or recommendations for particular titles then freebie screeners won’t be sent out to Blu-ray.com anymore? Or, something more subtle, like that screeners will be purposely delayed in shipment to Blu-ray.com in comparison to other more ‘WB friendly’ sites?

I see this as the primo issue, rather than some mastering or authoring misstep with a solitary title like FOTR or anything else, for that matter.

[svenge]

From my perspective, for the most part WB seems more and more like Mos Eisley...

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

lol, what do you do Denon, drag race on the side, when you're not playing golf?

I wish! Although before I took a promotion in 2005, I used to play golf 3 times a week. Those were the days. Now I'm lucky to play once a month.

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Well, whether you’re in the pro or anti camp regarding potential picture quality issues of this Blu-ray set, I think it was quite poor judgment on the part of the content provider in Burbank to single out this forum and ask that the screenshots of the Trilogy be removed from Ken Brown’s review.

Granted, Blu-ray.com is now probably the world leader in terms of discussing and debating things specifically regarding Blu-ray, but that was quite a bold move. When I first heard about ‘the intervention’, it reminded me of a famous line spoken by Randy Quaid in Days of Thunder concerning a monkey and a football as to who made that call.

The perception among just about everyone is that smacks of interfering with the review and the reviewer, or subtle tampering.

I mean what’s next?.... if the Blu-ray.com reviewers’ don’t give high enough scores or recommendations for particular titles then freebie screeners won’t be sent out to Blu-ray.com anymore? Or, something more subtle, like that screeners will be purposely delayed in shipment to Blu-ray.com in comparison to other more ‘WB friendly’ sites?

I see this as the primo issue, rather than some mastering or authoring misstep with a solitary title like FOTR or anything else, for that matter.

This is really sad. Was there any explanation given as to why the screencaps of the trilogy had to be removed?

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I see this as the primo issue, rather than some mastering or authoring misstep with a solitary title like FOTR or anything else, for that matter.

Has Sony ever done anything of the sort on this (or other) sites? Or is this unique to WB?

Hey, for giggles, does Sony corporate actually have an official stance on your participation here?

[Diesel]

Why would Sony care about Penton's involvement on this site, all he does is clean out the locker rooms at the athletic club anyway

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Oliver K

This is really sad. Was there any explanation given as to why the screencaps of the trilogy had to be removed?

If anyone bothered to read a Warner press release on its Blu-ray titles, it clearly states "no screen captures," so they are just enforcing a written policy that they have. They aren't singling out these titles.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Has Sony ever done anything of the sort on this (or other) sites?

*Selective forum or web-hosting enforcement*?

Not that I’m aware of. Official reviews and official reviewers, whether it be for online AV forums, AV magazines, entertainment writers for newspapers, etc. are considered to be a protected lot. They’re doing the best they can, given their experience, abilities, etc.

For instance, the only communication I have ever had with reviewers is to offer them inside or previously unrecognized information regarding some aspect of a movie ranging anywhere from the principal photography of the original motion picture to the compression/authoring of the Blu-ray title itself, so they are as well-informed as possible.

What they choose to do with that information in a negative or positive fashion, as reviewers reviewing a video product, is completely their prerogative. My only aim is that they are as well-informed as possible.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Hey, for giggles, does Sony corporate actually have an official stance on your participation here?

“I hate that Penton guy. He only gives out one towel and I sweat like a pig when I workout”.

[jw]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

*Selective forum or web-hosting enforcement*?

Not that I’m aware of. Official reviews and official reviewers, whether it be for online AV forums, AV magazines, entertainment writers for newspapers, etc. are considered to be a protected lot. They’re doing the best they can, given their experience, abilities, etc.

For instance, the only communication I have ever had with reviewers is to offer them inside or previously unrecognized information regarding some aspect of a movie ranging anywhere from the principal photography of the original motion picture to the compression/authoring of the Blu-ray title itself, so they are as well-informed as possible.

What they choose to do with that information in a negative or positive fashion, as reviewers reviewing a video product, is completely their prerogative. My only aim is that they are as well-informed as possible.

Hey, when you provide the best material possible, Its never an issue. Of course their will always be hiccups, but we learn from those and make sure it doesnt happen again. i.e Fifth Element....Sony made it right

[sharkshark]

...yeah, they did. It's still paying dividends, and a clear example (along with the likes of Disney, copping to the cropping issue on Pirates) of when a studio does the right thing. I mentioned before the sister music company doing right by replacing completely the Miles set after it was discovered that packaging was actually causing damage to some discs with glue residue.

Penton, just for historical sake (and cuz I think it gives you even more credence at times like this, towelboy job aside), what were your public reactions to the original Fifth Element release? Are there other Sony titles that, while maybe not at the level of needing recall/replacement like 5thE, are nonetheless Sony titles that you think could/should have been done better, and would like to see, in an ideal way, revisited in the future?

[sharkshark]

BEHOLD! Here I am, a shark chumming the waters with food for thought!

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...9#post18433689

And I quote:

You "grain" lovers really crack me up. Film has grain because it is an imperfect method of capturing images, be it movie or still life. Sometimes there is an artistic intent but usually NOT. With earlier movie film, there was intense lighting to permit the use of slower speed film to avoid grain, but alas, people have gotten use to it so they do not object as much. And the more modern films have more grain....

In time of the chemical processing of photos as the only method available, photo experts did not jump up and down and holler "great grain, love the grain structure, it is so intact.....yadada". same back then for movies as well

Indeed, it was just the opposite, and grain was about as despised as digital noise is now.

I suppose some day we will have people going on about great digital noise, it so intact. That would make just as much sense.

Feed on the chum, my pretties.... FEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED!!!!

[Monkey]

Nice, I'd like if that user came to blu-ray.com

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

If anyone bothered to read a Warner press release on its Blu-ray titles, it clearly states "no screen captures," so they are just enforcing a written policy that they have. They aren't singling out these titles.

From when was that press release? Obviously screencaps were not pulled for The Blind Side and Ninja Assassin and these are titles with a mid march release date.

[Jeff Kleist]

From when was that press release? Obviously screencaps were not pulled for The Blind Side and Ninja Assassin and these are titles with a mid march release date.

Paperwork comes with the screeners