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

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Uh, isn't that discussed in the film? It's been a while since I saw it (theatrically), but IIRC:

[Show spoiler]
They talk about Leo getting into a fight when he got called "Laeddis" by Noyce

[Show spoiler] It was mentioned but, I think it is/was not a foregone conclusion in the movie that the physical altercation resulted in that laceration or abrasion to “Teddy’s” head. Did you figure that out on your own during the movie, or after you finished the flick and gave it some retrospective afterthought? Regardless, you are correct and I’m impressed.

I’ll admit, from the get-go, I thought Marty S. was being very coy with us and that the wound was secondary to a skin burn suffered from a previously ineffectual electroshock *therapy* that “Teddy” had been given which we, as audiences, were not privy to, as it had happened in the past, i.e. before the boat ride to the island. So, I was alerted (for the wrong reason) from the very beginning that “Teddy” was not all that he appeared to be.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Or does this have something to do with grading?

Nope, I think that Ralph P. already sorta took care of that by inadvertently quoting a past post of mine about 'sepia tone'.

It was to allow me to make a YouTube tie-in to really weird *science* (with documentary proof) in order to freak you out.

Warning to other viewers - Do not watch this clip if you have a queasy stomach because sometimes viewing past reality can be more troublesome than Hollywood fiction….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0aNILW6ILk

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Ralph P.

Greetings,

Great post Penton-man. I can appreciate your well thought out reponse and find your candor refreshing. I also agree with your comments regarding the other writers mentioned.

Best regards,

Well, thank you. I’ll add via Postscript that I most admire reviewers who don’t do rants.

And also add John Puccio to the list of fine reviewers, as he has a long experience in reviewing home media software (even prior to Blu-ray) and I feel sorry that he was inappropriately attacked by an internet nutter in regards to a benign principal photographic issue of a certain motion picture, in order to, discredit his whole Blu-ray review .

I recently corrected (after being asked about it) a somewhat similar benign mistake by a writer….
https://forum.blu-ray.com/insider-di...ml#post3487475

and despite the fact that Studio Daily is held in much more esteem by industry professionals (and therefore read) than is any internet audio video board, I didn’t go Neanderthal on the poor writer, who as I said, made a benign mistake.

Official Blu-ray reviewers (by trade) have my sympathy as all you folks have a target on your back, constantly.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Nope, I think that Ralph P. already sorta took care of that by inadvertently quoting a past post of mine about 'sepia tone'.

It was to allow me to make a YouTube tie-in to really weird *science* (with documentary proof) in order to freak you out.

Warning to other viewers - Do not watch this clip if you have a queasy stomach because sometimes viewing past reality can be more troublesome than Hollywood fiction….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0aNILW6ILk

Weirdly, I actually saw that PBS doc.

Again, mild spoiler:

[Show spoiler]It's also a tie in, if you wish, to Cukoo's Nest. Not to trumpet my horn, or whatever, but, yeah, I felt an "a ha" moment when the fight was discussed, that this is how he got the band-aid, before the final reveal. I did not, however, clue in that his "partner" was in fact his doctor.

Additionally, I like the ambivalence about the ending - he's either faking it in order to be punished, or he's genuinely still sick. It's, of course, an interesting question, but there's no definitive answer, making it all the more intriguing. Similar, I'd say, to Inception (where the question about the ending is less interesting than the process of the film unfolding)

[sharkshark]

Boo!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_5,00.html

BOOO!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_8,00.html

BOOOOOOO!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_11,00.html

[sharkshark]

oh, and this is a delicious link, and seemingly an excellent use of 3D:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/10/m...e-in-worlds-f/

btw, I'll get a chance to see the 3D film that just might make for a true artistic (not just commercial) triumph, as Herzog's film will in fact be playing TIFF. Yay!

[Penton-Man]

Denon CI should like this news – http://www.pga.com/news/pga/turner-s...a-championship

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Weirdly, I actually saw that PBS doc...

I haven’t had the chance to give it a listen but, I’m told if you can tolerate the f-bombs, this podcast interview gives further insight into some of the nuances of Shutter Island…directly from the screenwriter herself.
Scroll down to Laeta K. -
http://creativescreenwritingmagazine.blogspot.com/

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Denon CI should like this news – http://www.pga.com/news/pga/turner-s...a-championship

Penton...very cool indeed!

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Boo!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_5,00.html

BOOO!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_8,00.html

BOOOOOOO!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_11,00.html

Does anyone actually read that magazine?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

Does anyone actually read that magazine?

by reading those three and a few others, I would guess not anyone with a functioning brain

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

Does anyone actually read that magazine?

I do.

Note the article is YOU called overrated. Not the magazine. EW thinks they are "must see".

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I do.

Note the article is YOU called overrated. Not the magazine. EW thinks they are "must see".

Exactly. EW's actually not bad, all things considered, but it's reflecting the idiocy of a few commenters.

Proving the idiocy of the common commenter, like shooting (12) Monkeys in a barrel....

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Exactly. EW's actually not bad, all things considered, but it's reflecting the idiocy of a few commenters.

Proving the idiocy of the common commenter, like shooting (12) Monkeys in a barrel....

Same could apply to more than a few threads here at Blu-ray.com

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

If you can count the number of legs on a fly in the image or, the number of nose hairs that an actor has, etc., then who cares much about colors/contrast? And nobody bug me about ‘Leon’, ‘Dracula’, ‘Ghostbusters’, etc. because the making of all those Blu-ray movies was either approved or personally supervised by the Director and/or the Director of Photography. Ergo, they are all officially kosher….I’m invoking the Gladiator Color Grading Acceptance Rule…..retroactively.

I am also surprised about the lenient treatment of Gladiator as opposed to Bram Stokers Dracula where the previous LD, DVD whatever was sometimes held as the gold standard or of course film prints. Obviously all of this does not matter that much with Gladiator for a reason or another and it cannot be approval from the Director or DOP.

I does seem a bit like a trend that says: I won't complain if it looks prettier to me. I still hope to hear about Ridley Scotts reasoning for the changed color palette - was this the way he always wanted the movie to look or did he just decide that he would prefer a look that is a bit more 'modern' and 'inviting' now despite having been happy with the previous rather gloomy look of the film?

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

As an aside, this preferential value bias for resolution over color accuracy is not exclusive to some home theater videophiles.

Also, in the film-making business, in contradistinction to colorists and some DP’s, I think the most important thing the vfx guys care about is extracting the cleanest mattes, so I believe, to a man (or woman), they would prefer material be sent to them at the highest optical resolution practical (lol, as long as they’re being paid by the hour/session and not by the project, per se) which would place the Northlight as the pie in their eyes…rather than the Arri scanner.

Scanner color accuracy and native optical resolution aside, I did get a kick out of this guy’s frustrated rant from several months ago which someone e-mailed me because the author seems so upset with digital colorists over what he sees as a disturbing new trend which he refers to as an “infection” involving original color grading choices made in the DI suite -

http://theabyssgazes.blogspot.com/20...ease-stop.html

Interesting to hear that the resolution madness is not endemic to the home theater world and thanks for the link - that was a great read and oh so true

I surely understand that not every movie has to have natural colors but we really have a problem when many movies look the same or very similar in a distorted and unnatural way.

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

These won’t be passed out either in gift baskets to watch movies at home-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MythJLg8IGU

'Technology' like this makes me angry - no wonder there is no appreciation for movies anymore when they are now watched on ridiculous displays that measure a few inches!

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

If you’re thinking about the one with that bridge on the river in South-East Asia being the Sat. evening screening ……

Nope.

Well, I guess it could be anything then, including the upcoming Tommy.

I even thought about L of A even though it is rather improbable. When completed it should be perfect for showing off those Sony 4k projectors

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Boo!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_5,00.html

BOOO!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_8,00.html

BOOOOOOO!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_11,00.html

You surely are familiar with The American Cinema: directors and directions, 1929-1968 by Andrew Sarris?
He dislikes most of the big and epic productions from the 50ies and 60ies, including the first two you link to and Ben Hur (He curiously seemed to like KING OF KINGS by Nic Ray). So you see the uneducated masses are not alone with their opinion

One does not always have to agree with Sarris (and certainly quite often I don't) but his book The American Cinema makes for a very refreshing and sometimes hilarious read.

[Dennis M]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Boo!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_5,00.html

BOOO!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_8,00.html

BOOOOOOO!

http://www.ew.com/ew/gallery/0,,20406056_11,00.html

OMG blasphemy! Burn the heretic at the stake!

[Oliver K]

Hi Penton,

on another thread the question came up about the 6k scan of THE LEOPARD, so maybe you can clear this up:
Was the 6k scan itself perfomed in house or was it contracted out to another facility? I understand that you commented on the 4k workflow but not the image acquisition and the studio daily blog does not go into these things either and it would be asking too much from the writer anyway.

Not that there would be anything wrong with this work being performed somewhere else - 35mm 8perf is a rather unusual format and if Sony Colorworks can get the scan done via a partner facility who handles special formats why not?

And as I have written on the other thread: I really don't want to start a debate over this