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

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Methinks Penton's been in Cali too long... If you can't tell the difference between an aversion to artificial grain reduction (to the point of creating the much balyhooed "wax figure" look) and a preferred film source, well, I don't know what to say.

No, you don't understand.

Alas , the "conditioning" to 'dnr' as the result of the recent online activists' missions (RAH and Bill) to 'save' Spartacus and Predator as well as future films from misguided practices by Uni and Fox is already having a negative effect which I feared all along, when it could have and should have all been handled behind closed doors with face to face meetings.

I’m not talking about “DNR” or what you guys think as “DNR” in Blu-ray movies.
Many VFX houses degrain the scene(s) before making a composite and then *regrain* it (with FAKE grain) after they perform their magic.

You natural grain lovers have been seeing FAKE grain in motion pictures with VFX shots for years, clueless to the fact, with no complaints and actually enjoying the look.

It all kinda reminds me of the quote in Rob Roy…”Young Cunningham here was unable to tell arse from ****.”

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

+1

They don’t hold a candle to Julie Christie in Doctor Zhivago which I think just may be my most favorite motion picture of all time and is playing at Penton’s beach house tonight in Blu-ray glory.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Alas , the "conditioning" to 'dnr' as the result of the recent online activists' missions (RAH and Bill) to 'save' Spartacus and Predator as well as future films from misguided practices by Uni and Fox is already having a negative effect which I feared all along, when it could have and should have all been handled behind closed doors with face to face meetings.

wait, I thought kvetching from bloggers on the internet had no effect on the studio decision making... now it just has negative effect? Are you actually saying that the business practices of major studios are being (adversely) affected by the likes of Bill Hunt, and that instead of publicly pointing out problem discs that he should have setup private meetings?

Isn't there a more relevant question at hand, why the hell do these releases have to be problematic in the first place? Patton was a mess, for whatever reason, and rather than dealing with it forthrightly like Sony did with Fifth Element they ignored concerns (in the sense that they continue to do the same thing, apparently, with the likes of Predator).

What exactly are you advocating? That review sites forgive the problematic discs because the (multi billion dollar corps) are having a rough time with this whole "look and sound of perfect" thing? I've seen of late (after the RAH back-and-forth) some mixed messages. Boldy, what are you advocating regarding the state of BD, given that many of us are not in the position to have behind-the-scenes meetings with these execs, but are perfectly able to kvetch online about this or that title. Frankly, you seem a bit defensive at times, excoriating those that simply don't like being burned by purchasing titles that aren't up to snuff for a variety of reasons. We'll give the studios credit that they're often under a great deal of economic pressure, particularly with catalogue titles, and give us, the masses, some credit that we're aware of artificial grain and other such processes, and that the intention, in the end, is to do the best possible job with any given title, and to not make it into some video game-like image to appeal to some fictional "J6P" that prefers their HD to be "shiny". You are an advocate for the studio(s), we get that. Bill, supposedly, is an advocate for consumers. He wouldn't need to be "ranting", in the end, if the studios were consistent across the board with their release philosophy.

Oh, and I'm saying nothing about today's matches, but I hope you enjoy them on you PVR.

[abintra]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Alas , the "conditioning" to 'dnr' as the result of the recent online activists' missions (RAH and Bill) to 'save' Spartacus and Predator as well as future films from misguided practices by Uni and Fox is already having a negative effect which I feared all along, when it could have and should have all been handled behind closed doors with face to face meetings.

What source or means do you feel should be used to inform interested consumers on quality and sub-par releases?

It reads, to me, that you are not a fan of captures even when done accurately and not selectively chosen with an agenda to distort the release as a whole. Even when utilized as a means to provide some additional context to a review (the lack of informed comments and people reaching conclusions based solely on them in a vacuum are obviously counterproductive). You have also been critical of those that presumably have more knowledge of the process when they attempt to highlight various releases publicly.

Edit: Apologies sharkshark. Didn't see your post before starting to ask also.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Did you examine some of those pre and post pics from that Surgeon’s website? If he hasn’t, perhaps he should post a pic of some patient that had druppers nearly down to her waist after nursing several children before she and her back were put out of their misery.

Don't twist my suggestion. Sometimes things, ideally, don't need to be tweaked to conform to some artificially, culturally designated form of "pretty" or "perfect". The preference, then, is to keep the original as intact as possible, and to love and respect things like droops, wrinkles, etc. that show us the lives we've actually lived (or, since this is ALL a giant metaphor, to keep the grain, where possible, showing the "scars" of the filmmaking process)

Plus, you aren't saying, surely, that the Jubalani-titted model above did the procedure in order to "fix" a mastectomy, but did so in order to have bazoombas that would be photog'd at the world cup. I think, in this case, it wouldn't hurt to say that bags-of-gummy fakeboobs are kinda icky, if you're going to choose between them and some of the home grown variety, no?

And, no, I can't believe this is what we've devolved into talking about...

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by abintra

What source or means do you feel should be used to inform interested consumers on quality and sub-par releases?

It reads, to me, that you are not a fan of captures even when done accurately and not selectively chosen with an agenda to distort the release as a whole. Even when utilized as a means to provide some additional context to a review (the lack of informed comments and people reaching conclusions based solely on them in a vacuum are obviously counterproductive). You have also been critical of those that presumably have more knowledge of the process when they attempt to highlight various releases publicly.

Edit: Apologies sharkshark. Didn't see your post before starting to ask also.

Oh, don't be silly, yours was written much better than mine, well said.

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

No, you don't understand.

Alas , the "conditioning" to 'dnr' as the result of the recent online activists' missions (RAH and Bill) to 'save' Spartacus and Predator as well as future films from misguided practices by Uni and Fox is already having a negative effect which I feared all along, when it could have and should have all been handled behind closed doors with face to face meetings.

I’m not talking about “DNR” or what you guys think as “DNR” in Blu-ray movies.
Many VFX houses degrain the scene(s) before making a composite and then *regrain* it (with FAKE grain) after they perform their magic.

You natural grain lovers have been seeing FAKE grain in motion pictures with VFX shots for years, clueless to the fact, with no complaints and actually enjoying the look.

It all kinda reminds me of the quote in Rob Roy…”Young Cunningham here was unable to tell arse from ****.”

Penton,

I finally got a chance to watch "Predator" last night and my biggest complaint is it doesn't look like film...it looks like a soap opera. Additionally, there are some scenes where Arnold looks like an action figure instead of an action hero. The bad thing is a few minutes later, flesh tones look much better and more lifelike, so it's extremely inconsistent. Is it the end of the world? Absolutely not, but my biggest gripe is it doesn't look natural.

Regardless, have a happy 4th with friends and family.

Best,

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

I’m not talking about “DNR” or what you guys think as “DNR” in Blu-ray movies.
Many VFX houses degrain the scene(s) before making a composite and then *regrain* it (with FAKE grain) after they perform their magic.

You natural grain lovers have been seeing FAKE grain in motion pictures with VFX shots for years, clueless to the fact, with no complaints and actually enjoying the look.

HUH? What sort of negative effect are you talking about Sir Penton?

Give me my grain or give me death!

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

Penton,

I finally got a chance to watch "Predator" last night and my biggest complaint is it doesn't look like film...it looks like a soap opera. Additionally, there are some scenes where Arnold looks like an action figure instead of an action hero. The bad thing is a few minutes later, flesh tones look much better and more lifelike, so it's extremely inconsistent. Is it the end of the world? Absolutely not, but my biggest gripe is it doesn't look natural.

Regardless, have a happy 4th with friends and family.

Best,

Same to you Mr. Antagonist. Remember Denon, the truth will set you free.

[MerrickG]

Penton, its also important to say that for the most part, the studios DO get it right. Realistically speaking the bad titles have for the most part been the exception and not the norm.

People have griped about Universal, but they do have some excellent discs too.
Apollo 13, The Bourne Films, Miami Vice, Dune and all of the Fast and the Furious films.

Paramount/DW has also (w/ a few exceptions) been excellent. I have many of their discs and am enjoying them like no other.

I guess, I see where you are coming from in that some of these complaints make it seem like the majority of the work they do is wrong and that simply isnt the case.

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Penton, its also important to say that for the most part, the studios DO get it right. Realistically speaking the bad titles have for the most part been the exception and not the norm.

People have griped about Universal, but they do have some excellent discs too.
Apollo 13, The Bourne Films, Miami Vice, Dune and all of the Fast and the Furious films.

Paramount/DW has also (w/ a few exceptions) been excellent. I have many of their discs and am enjoying them like no other.

I guess, I see where you are coming from in that some of these complaints make it seem like the majority of the work they do is wrong and that simply isnt the case.

I think the track record for Blu-ray is much better than DVD at the same point in the format. Heck, how long did it take to get anamorphic transfers and get rid of pan-and-scan titles?

Even the worst looking Blu-ray looks pretty darn good....the same couldn't be said for DVDs.

[tvine2000]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Penton, its also important to say that for the most part, the studios DO get it right. Realistically speaking the bad titles have for the most part been the exception and not the norm.

People have griped about Universal, but they do have some excellent discs too.
Apollo 13, The Bourne Films, Miami Vice, Dune and all of the Fast and the Furious films.

Paramount/DW has also (w/ a few exceptions) been excellent. I have many of their discs and am enjoying them like no other.

I guess, I see where you are coming from in that some of these complaints make it seem like the majority of the work they do is wrong and that simply isnt the case.

I agree with you ,but doesn't it seem strange these issues with a bd movie seem to crop up when a catalog title comes out that a lot of people look forward too. I also agree about close door meetings,they don't work. I have been to a few with other products,all you do debate the issue and noting gets done.Its better to get it out there. But as others have said if the studio[in this case fox] would have taken the time and hit a common ground with the dnr,put it on a 50gb disc, avc ,PREDATOR WOULD HAVE BEEN PRASED AS ONE OF THE BEST OF BLU'S THIS YEAR,ok maybe not but surely this debate wouldn't be happening.

[MerrickG]

Originally Posted by tvine2000

I agree with you ,but doesn't it seem strange these issues with a bd movie seem to crop up when a catalog title comes out that a lot of people look forward too. I also agree about close door meetings,they don't work. I have been to a few with other products,all you do debate the issue and noting gets done.Its better to get it out there. But as others have said if the studio[in this case fox] would have taken the time and hit a common ground with the dnr,put it on a 50gb disc, avc ,PREDATOR WOULD HAVE BEEN PRASED AS ONE OF THE BEST OF BLU'S THIS YEAR,ok maybe not but surely this debate wouldn't be happening.

Again you are making it sound like its happening on EVERY catalog title we are looking forward to and that is simply not the case. Most (if not all) of the catalog titles that came out this year that I personally had been big time waiting for have looked awesome on bluray.

Again, Im not saying the issue is not existant by any means, but I gather is that all of this shouting and hollering (which is our right as consumers) is making the problem seem like its much worse than it probably is. No titles should be affected by excessive DNR and Im just afraid that the complaining is going to make studios hesitant to release any films since they know it will be scrutinized either way (too much grain, too much DNR).

Of course, Penton might be to it by saying the studios may just DNR the master and artificially add the grain back in.

[Penton-Man]

My, my you boys have been busy.

And when my wife found out that Doctor Zhivago was over three hours long, we’ve had to postpone the event till later this weekend so, you all have me for a few moments before she gives me *the look*.

Seems to me, after a quick prevue of the posts, much are of the same theme so I’ll try to hit the high points of each the best I can.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Are you actually saying that the business practices of major studios are being (adversely) affected by the likes of Bill Hunt...

No, I’m not saying that. Which is the whole point. They certainly are not with their public cathartic whining(s), (be it the screenshot scientists, RAH or Bill Hunt) which seem to come up every year or so with other titles which don’t meet some bloggers’ expectations.

The last example which I remember of such nonsensical online behavior was the public disparagement of The Dark Knight by the screenshot scientists and the co-owner of AVS (no less) due to its edge enhancement which embodied the same type of attention (or more!) as Predator is doing now. That overflowed to members here and other places because there is so much cross-pollination these days between forums since some other AV boards have literally become almost dead zones, while Ice has himself a gold mine here.

Anyway, I remember bringing it up in passing to the V.P. of marketing over at WB, George Feltenstein to be exact, no reason to mince words (hell, I’ve even got the conversation on tape because the dang machine at home was running as I inadvertently forgot to turn it off after he pinged me and the recorded message was giving its spiel before I picked up). Anyway, I told George about all the dissatisfaction concerning the digital sharpening evident on The Dark Knight and how the bloggers all over the internet were all riled up. He was totally unaware of the online situation later saying that be that as it may, “It certainly didn’t affect sales as far as we’re concerned”.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Isn't there a more relevant question at hand, why the hell do these releases have to be problematic in the first place?...

Have Bill or Robert ask the respective studios (Uni and Fox).

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

What exactly are you advocating?

People that have *connections* to the industry should do the responsible thing. Rather than somehow trying to leverage a studio with a rat’s ass amount of purchasing power by *rallying the troops on the internet*, they should plead their case in a private meeting to studio executives, or to a representative of the Director, etc., whether it be on ethical grounds as to maintaining the original look of the theatrical presentation with the Blu-ray incarnation or just plain what they think are better business policies to help grow the format.

That’s the way to do it and really the only viable option you’ve got as to the success of your cause.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Don't twist my suggestion. Sometimes things, ideally, don't need to be tweaked to conform to some artificially, culturally designated form of "pretty" or "perfect". The preference, then, is to keep the original as intact as possible, and to love and respect things like droops, wrinkles, etc. that show us the lives we've actually lived (or, since this is ALL a giant metaphor, to keep the grain, where possible, showing the "scars" of the filmmaking process)

Plus, you aren't saying, surely, that the Jubalani-titted model above did the procedure in order to "fix" a mastectomy, but did so in order to have bazoombas that would be photog'd at the world cup. I think, in this case, it wouldn't hurt to say that bags-of-gummy fakeboobs are kinda icky, if you're going to choose between them and some of the home grown variety, no?

And, no, I can't believe this is what we've devolved into talking about...

I don’t like your confrontation tone in the first part of your post.
As to the reminder, I think you just dislike big breasts, doesn’t matter if they’re real or not.

How’s she strike you? Real or is it Memorex? Does it matter? Not to me,….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vovkv...layer_embedded

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by DenonCI

Penton,

I finally got a chance to watch "Predator" last night and my biggest complaint is it doesn't look like film...it looks like a soap opera. Additionally, there are some scenes where Arnold looks like an action figure instead of an action hero. The bad thing is a few minutes later, flesh tones look much better and more lifelike, so it's extremely inconsistent. Is it the end of the world? Absolutely not, but my biggest gripe is it doesn't look natural.

Regardless, have a happy 4th with friends and family.

Best,

Thanks , same to you and your review of the Blu-ray is pretty much exactly what I’ve been told. It’s unfortunate to the *purists*, for the lack of a better word. For the record Shark, count me more of a purist, so much so that I have a rather extensive knowledge of the principal photography of Alien, of which I think you're a fan....or is it doctorossi, can't remember as it's getting late now.

Anyway Denon, I never knew Predator was such a cult classic to attract so much online attention. My only recollection of the production was that I was happy Arnold made it back for Maria’s weeding during the shoot as I had a high school crush on her when she attended StoneRidge and am, to this day, very fond of her and her family.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by merrick97

HUH? What sort of negative effect are you talking about Sir Penton?

What I’m saying is all the internet wheel spinning (which it is) is not going to cause any studio to do anything it doesn’t want to do in the first place, esp. when it is perceived as threatening. Did RAH’s public thrashing of Patton on Bill’s site a couple years back force/cause Fox not to apply excessive grain reduction to Predator? No…and that fiasco went on for months, if not over a year.

If anything, these online public disparagements of this movie or that movie have even less influence to the decision makers at studios as Blu-ray has gone mainstream. I know it may be frustrating for some to accept but, get over it already.

So, ultimately what happens every time these incidents prop up is that for the next year or two, viewers who read and post on internet boards once again become hyper-sensitized to dnr and instead of watching and enjoying the flick and thinking or concentrating on the actors’ performance, the production design, the cinematography, etc. –they’re searching for any indication of *being robbed* by DNR or what they presume is DNR at the HD mastering or encoding level.

So, every Blu-ray movie now will be *micro-managed* for signs of DNR and inevitably many innocent releases will be labeled as either ‘moderately dnr’ed’, ‘heavy dnr in this scene or that’, ‘a little dnr but it doesn’t make your eyes bleed’, etc. when the vast majority of the time these people don’t know what the hell they’re talking about. Then we get into the pro film grain vs. anti film grain debates which spawn as separate threads with the resultant sophmoric fighting for page after page.

The only thing these public castigations of a certain Blu-ray movie initiated by high-profile members or Insiders accomplish is to invigorate the screenshot scientists and the people who love to argue ceaselessly (be it pro-grain or anti-grain) while all the people who just want to watch the dang movie throw up their hands in disgust and leave the forums because the enthusiasm of the hobby is gone....or, they stay on the forums and miss out on some movies that they really should be enjoying at home, without hesitation.