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

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by wallendo

I think Cameron is just trying to make the Alien series look like Avatar. Older films should be presented as originally filmed. Deciding 25 years later, that he "intended" to film a different movie doesn't cut it.

Until you KNOW this, you shouldn't speak as though it were so.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by wallendo

Consistency is not part of the blu-ray lifestyle....

Yeah, I think the goalposts move back and forth depending on the particular movie, the Director involved and the fanboys’ affiliations with each motion picture. Although, I have found OliverK to be rather consistent in his cinematic principles , as the last time this kind of Director’s intent issue came up was with the color choices for the remastered version of Gladiator.

For the geeks out there, if Jim did the work with Skip (the colorist of which he alludes to - and has great hair by the way, of which I’m envious compared to my always wayward mop ) over at Modern, I think that they are still running DaVinci Resolve color corrector systems to do the actual degraining and denoising.

Fairly recently, they’ve come out with an economical software version –
http://www.soundonsound.com/news?NewsID=12787
^ the rep says 2-3 hundred dollars when he really meant $200,000 - $300,000

[Penton-Man]

Open question to any members across the pond who are football fans and had the opportunity to catch last weekend’s Liverpool/Arsenal match in 3D –

Did you like it? Dislike it? Are there any comments online posted about the quality of the broadcast?....like from some Liverpool or Arsenal supporter fansite, etc.

I'm curious as to how the presentation worked out.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Open question to any members across the pond who are football fans and had the opportunity to catch last weekend’s Liverpool/Arsenal match in 3D –

Did you like it? Dislike it? Are there any comments online posted about the quality of the broadcast?....like from some Liverpool or Arsenal supporter fansite, etc.

I'm curious as to how the presentation worked out.

I can say that I wish they'd try to get a bit of a quality level into the basic HD broadcast before they attempt to tackle 3D. If I had a dime for every guy I watch football with who mutters "Can you believe they call this HD?"...

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Oliver K

He specifially said he went over the complete movie and when he talked about eliminating the grain it certainly was also meant for the whole movie or otherwise the new Blu-Ray would look really silly with jumps from heavy grain to no grain at all

I was unclear - I know he did the whole film, he sounded like he had left the other cut alone. It was my very point, that the whole original film is no doubt a subset of the (longer) director's cut. Ergo, yeah, we're not getting a grain-intact version. Not putting a value judgement on that, just amused by how he couched the phrasing at the end.

It seems to happen more often now with the Blu-Ray format where within the limits of the format the look and/or the content of the theatrical presentation is not available anymore but instead a different looking and/or longer version.

No, I know. Again, I go back to stuff like wire removal (that brought me to this thread in the first place, lo those many moons ago), where it's all about a balance between the desire to represent the theatrical presentation, balanced by improvements in tech. If the director wanted less grain, but used a stock which (he admits) wasn't up to snuff (describes it as having been replaced), then the grainyness was not an aesthetic decision, but an unwanted artifact, one now scrubbed, just like wires removed from a classic film, but with the benefit of the direction of the original filmmaker.

[Penton-Man]

Doby, I tried.

Your request was passed on to Adam…. http://www.linkedin.com/in/adamsosinsky but alas, he’s holding his Blu music cards very close to his chest.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

No, I know. Again, I go back to stuff like wire removal (that brought me to this thread in the first place, lo those many moons ago)....

And I thought that what brought you to this thread in the first place was my good looks, esp. the dental work.

Shark, that’s really stressing my memory neurons but if memory serves, you originally asked me for any ‘inside’ stories on the BD production of Munchausen and I volunteered to you that those pesky wires were removed for the Blu-ray incarnation….to which your beef was not so much that the wires were gotten rid of, but rather that you or other viewers may have had the working assumption/impression that the Director was not directly involved in the decision making process?

Dude, that was over a year and a half? or so ago, are you still beating that horse? Heck, even Harris took my part on that one.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

I can say that I wish they'd try to get a bit of a quality level into the basic HD broadcast before they attempt to tackle 3D. If I had a dime for every guy I watch football with who mutters "Can you believe they call this HD?"...

I haven’t yet watched this week’s Chelsea match in HD from ESPN…..no time. Did you find the HD quality of that to be subpar?

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Until you KNOW this, you shouldn't speak as though it were so.

Well, I wouldn’t worry about it because I’m certain the reassurances are already *in the mail*, so to speak and the good thing is that Jim is very cognizant of the Blu-ray format, for if he wasn’t, he certainly wouldn’t set aside time to kick-off Blu-Con 2010 with Jon Landau…..
http://www.blu-con.com/2010/2010/08/...ar-filmmakers/

Heads-up to all those interested parties….”Special sessions will also be held on Blu-ray 3D, BD-Live and classic films on Blu-ray; along with the networked players and other emerging trends that are anticipated to drive Blu-ray sales in the fourth quarter.”

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

And I thought that what brought you to this thread in the first place was my good looks, esp. the dental work.

Shark, that’s really stressing my memory neurons but if memory serves, you originally asked me for any ‘inside’ stories on the BD production of Munchausen and I volunteered to you that those pesky wires were removed for the Blu-ray incarnation….to which your beef was not so much that the wires were gotten rid of, but rather that you or other viewers may have had the working assumption/impression that the Director was not directly involved in the decision making process?

Dude, that was over a year and a half? or so ago, are you still beating that horse? Heck, even Harris took my part on that one.

heh, no, my point (relevant all the more due to stuff you've been bringing up) was that even IF the Director wants it done, after the fact, is it made OK? And, yeah, I was never advocating one side or another, just saying that it's occasionally a slippery slope.

Like, for example, when a director decides to de-grain a film 20+ years after the fact, does he/she have the right to alter the film to their new point of view, or should the impetus be on the original work? What about formats that betray more of the negative that may have been projected (ie., BD that may in fact accentuate wires/elements that otherwise would have been obscured by the printing/projection process)

That's what we were talking about. And, humbly, that's what we're still talking about

Then and now, I provided no answers, just questions, I was just mildly amused that we seem to be covering the same type of discussions regarding the role of the filmmaker in 'altering' their original works.

And, yeah, extending from what you and RAH were suggesting back then, the grain removal of Aliens should be totally Kosher, because the Director has decided it so...

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I haven’t yet watched this week’s Chelsea match in HD from ESPN…..no time. Did you find the HD quality of that to be subpar?

We don't have ESPN, but the Arsenal/Liv'pool match was on Setanta HD, free for a week. It looked pretty bad (50>60 conversion, and not enough bandwidth).

And up here it's $15/month for that channel alone!

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I haven’t yet watched this week’s Chelsea match in HD from ESPN…..no time. Did you find the HD quality of that to be subpar?

I didn't watch it, either.

[Doctorossi]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

It looked pretty bad (50>60 conversion, and not enough bandwidth).

Yeah, shredded 480p with chroma values you can count on one hand is about the look on the Fox Soccer Channel feed. I don't think I'd want to know what that would do in 3D.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

Yeah, shredded 480p with chroma values you can count on one hand is about the look on the Fox Soccer Channel feed. I don't think I'd want to know what that would do in 3D.

I may have mispoke, but I -think- it's 50i to 60i conversion in 1920x1080 on that station... I dunno, the bandwidth throttling's more of an issue, alas. Again, if it wasn't premium it'd be one thing, but to pay that much, you'd want (of course) pretty damn good signal.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

heh, no, my point (relevant all the more due to stuff you've been bringing up) was that even IF the Director wants it done, after the fact, is it made OK? And, yeah, I was never advocating one side or another, just saying that it's occasionally a slippery slope.

Gotcha.

But no, it’s not quite the same with Munchausen and the wire removal thing. I don’t think that you understand. The wires were less apparent on the theatrical release prints than they would have been on the Blu-ray incarnation (if nothing had been done to rectify the situation) because digitally scanning an earlier generation film source and transferring to Blu-ray can bring out some things more (or make them more apparent) than what audiences saw with the typical release print.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

And, yeah, extending from what you and RAH were suggesting back then, the grain removal of Aliens should be totally Kosher, because the Director has decided it so...

Hey, don’t extrapolate what I said to Aliens. I really said that so that merrick wouldn’t freak out about the Aliens Blu-ray and actually start working on something more important like the Abstract or Title page of his thesis.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Doctorossi

I didn't watch it, either.

I meant ManU as in the ManU/NewcastleU match…..if that makes any difference.

Honest to God, I don't even know what's on my DVR at home anymore. I thought it was Chelsea.

[Vincent Pereira]

Originally Posted by Bobby Henderson

I can't remember where I read it, but I'm pretty sure film stock limitations were a big culprit in why Cameron chose to film Aliens in the 1.85:1 format rather than crop down to 2.35:1. In cropping to 'scope the grain would have been significantly enlarged. He could have filmed Aliens in 4/35 anamorphic (like the original movie was filmed), but James Cameron has avoided shooting anamorphic. It's easier to shoot a movie with spherical lenses.

I think you're recalling an old article in THE PERFECT VISION magazine, and Cameron didn't choose "standard" 1.85:1 35mm vs. 2.35:1 Super-35 extraction for ALIENS because of the graininess of the filmstock, but rather because he was talked out of using Super-35 by a lab tech who convinced him that using Super-35 would be a 'nightmare' in post-production since 'the entire film would be an optical', and since he (Cameron) was used to using "standard' 1.85:1 already anyway, he choose to use it again for ALIENS. The point is, Cameron was very interested in using Super-35 to achieve a 'Scope theatrical print that could then be transferred to video without the usual massive cropping/panning-and-scanning when prepping ALIENS, but the use of Super-35 was SO NEW when ALIENS was made that he was able to be talked out of it. Between the making of ALIENS and THE ABYSS he was was shown some actual lab tests that changed his mind, plus Kodak had improved their high-speed filmstocks during that interval, as well.

Vincent

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Vincent Pereira

The point is, Cameron was very interested in using Super-35 to achieve a 'Scope theatrical print that could then be transferred to video without the usual massive cropping/panning-and-scanning when prepping ALIENS, but the use of Super-35 was SO NEW when ALIENS was made that he was able to be talked out of it.

Of course he could have not been afraid of 'scope and shot it 'scope.

John Carpenter was able to shoot Halloween in 'scope on a VERY limited budget and look great for what it was.

[Oliver K]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

heh, no, my point (relevant all the more due to stuff you've been bringing up) was that even IF the Director wants it done, after the fact, is it made OK? And, yeah, I was never advocating one side or another, just saying that it's occasionally a slippery slope.

Like, for example, when a director decides to de-grain a film 20+ years after the fact, does he/she have the right to alter the film to their new point of view, or should the impetus be on the original work? What about formats that betray more of the negative that may have been projected (ie., BD that may in fact accentuate wires/elements that otherwise would have been obscured by the printing/projection process)

That's what we were talking about. And, humbly, that's what we're still talking about

Then and now, I provided no answers, just questions, I was just mildly amused that we seem to be covering the same type of discussions regarding the role of the filmmaker in 'altering' their original works.

And, yeah, extending from what you and RAH were suggesting back then, the grain removal of Aliens should be totally Kosher, because the Director has decided it so...

The altering of the original work is a slippery slope indeed and I think that this discussion will stay with us for as long as the format exists.

When a director like Cameron wants to alter his film it at least cannot be hold against the studio so everybody who dislikes the revised version can concentrate his negative feelings exclusively on the director

And while most of the time we can choose to not buy the disc we don't like it will not be that easy with Aliens as it will be part of a boxset and it will just come with the other parts that one still might want to own - tough luck!