Revisionism: the director can alter his work... and I can hate it!

[bferr1]

Originally Posted by jadedeath

There's a slight difference between physics altered for effects. And CGI nonsense put in there that isn't even remotely physically possible.

Jumping out of a plane on an inflatable raft, IS possible, unlikely but possible. Getting nuked and surviving flying through the air in a lead lined fridge. You do the math.

Logan

Wait, aren't you defending a movie where a man punctures a second man's chest with his fist, rips out his still-beating heart and then shows it to him?

[bruce_pullen]

Originally Posted by bferr1

Wait, aren't you defending a movie where a man punctures a second man's chest with his fist, rips out his still-beating heart and then shows it to him?

(Cue Tweety Bird) "HE IS".. "HE IS".

[jdc115]

Personally, I would like both or all version available but I would understand if the director restricted it to what ever version he wants. Though in many cases, I would not but it if that is my only choice.

I remember this being raised before in another thread, should the director by able to acclaim his film as being Academy award winning if he choose to release only his director cut and not the theater release which actually one the award?

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by bferr1

Wait, aren't you defending a movie where a man punctures a second man's chest with his fist, rips out his still-beating heart and then shows it to him?

And there is the irony of the Indy 4 bashing, surviving a nuclear blast in a fridge is stupid and so lame and so Lucas like, not reality, so stupid. But the old Lucas in Temple Of Doom with a guy looking as his own ripped out heart still alive that was so realistic, so cool, so fun Some people just plai refuse to admit that the movies are the same but they have change by growing up and don't see them with the kids eyes they use to have and want to blame the director for it.

[vanishingpoint]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

Some people just plai refuse to admit that the movies are the same but they have change by growing up and don't see them with the kids eyes they use to have and want to blame the director for it.

Yeah, what he said.

[Riff Magnum]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

And there is the irony of the Indy 4 bashing, surviving a nuclear blast in a fridge is stupid and so lame and so Lucas like, not reality, so stupid. But the old Lucas in Temple Of Doom with a guy looking as his own ripped out heart still alive that was so realistic, so cool, so fun Some people just plai refuse to admit that the movies are the same but they have change by growing up and don't see them with the kids eyes they use to have and want to blame the director for it.

That's very true and i think that's what has happened with me and Star Wars. Some of it is just plain horrible on its own, but putting a young CGI Annakin next to Obi Wan and Yoda at the end of Jedi is just inexcusable. Just slipping it in there huh Lucas? I guess he really thinks these are good ideas?

[bferr1]

Originally Posted by Riff Magnum

...putting a young CGI Annakin next to Obi Wan and Yoda at the end of Jedi is just inexcusable. Just slipping it in there huh Lucas?

That wasn't a CGI Anakin, that was the real Hayden Christensen. Hard to tell 'em apart, I know.

[GGX]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

And there is the irony of the Indy 4 bashing, surviving a nuclear blast in a fridge is stupid and so lame and so Lucas like, not reality, so stupid. But the old Lucas in Temple Of Doom with a guy looking as his own ripped out heart still alive that was so realistic, so cool, so fun Some people just plai refuse to admit that the movies are the same but they have change by growing up and don't see them with the kids eyes they use to have and want to blame the director for it.

I don't know about that. For example, I'm no mega fan of Star Wars like some people. I never really grew up with the original trilogy and I've only seen it a couple of times. Same as the prequel trilogy. The original trilogy is outstanding to me. I can see why people like it so much. The prequel trilogy on the other hand just seems really lame, cheesy. With terrible acting and dialogue. Thats the best way I can describe it.

[Grubert]

French Connection cinematographer labels the recoloring 'atrocious,' washes his hands off the Blu-ray transfer:

Last night renowned French Connection cinematographer Owen Roizman trashed William Friedkin's bleachy, grain-heavy Blu-ray transfer of his 1971 Oscar-winning film, which many DVD and Blu-ray aficionados have already savagely dismissed. Roizman called the transfer "atrocious," "emasculated" and "horrifying." He said that he "wasn't consulted" by Freidkin and he "certainly wants to wash my hands of having had anything to do with [it]."

Roizman was speaking to Aaron Aradillas on a blog-radio show called "Back By Midnight." Thanks to Some Came Running's Glenn Kenny for the tip-off.

Roizman "had only heard about the new Blu-ray version [of The French Connection] when Aaron was booking his appearance," Kenny informs. "He went out and bought a Blu-ray player and the disc and did not at all like what he saw."

I transcribed some of what Roizman said so here's a fuller version: "Billy [Friedkin] for some reason decided to do this on his own. I wasn't consulted. I was appalled by it. I don't know what Billy was thinking. It's not the film that I shot, and I certainly want to to wash my hands of having had anything to do with this transfer, which I feel is atrocious."

He later called it an "emasculated" and "horrifying" transfer, and said "it would be a travesty to see The Exorcist [which Roizman also shot] transferred in this fashion."

Link

Listen