THE BORE
General => The Superdeep Borehole => Topic started by: warcock on February 29, 2008, 07:06:23 PM
-
Just went to bluray.com .. nuffin... not even in the coming soon section :-\
-
Whoever owns it doesn't give a fuck about it. The DVD release is shitty.
-
:maf
-
will they include the Falco video as a bonus feature
-
I've been waiting to buy it for years, something tells me I'm gonna keep waiting.
-
Whoever owns it doesn't give a fuck about it. The DVD release is shitty.
Didn't they make an ultimate edition a while back?
-
Whoever owns it doesn't give a fuck about it. The DVD release is shitty.
Didn't they make an ultimate edition a while back?
It sucks. It's the director's cut, which features more of Constanze, aka the worst character in the fucking movie.
-
TVC, have there been any noteworthy HD releases in the past 2 weeks? I've been too busy recently to keep track.
-
what ever happened to milos forman? he basically stopped making movies.
-
Eh? He made one just last year.
-
that was 2006, according to imdb (i thought man on the moon was his last one, to be honest). is he doing anything atm?
-
It sucks. It's the director's cut, which features more of Constanze, aka the worst character in the fucking movie.
Ah. I guess I will keep on not buying it then, and wait for the inevitable bluray dissapointment. :(
-
Now that I think about it, there are only a handful of the films in the Orion (RIP) catalog that have gotten anything more then a barebones release, if that. Which is a frigging crime considering their unusually high quality output.
Egads, they were great. (pours one out for House of Games, Miami Blues, UHF, The Arrival, etc.)
And Milos Foreman's latest just hit DVD, although the reviews haven't been any better then "Eh, its not that bad."
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51Awe5G%2Bi8L._SS500_.jpg)
-
House of Games just came out on Criterion late last year. It am awesome.
-
House of Games just came out on Criterion late last year. It am awesome.
fo reals? I needs to get some of dat!
-
javier bardem is a pretty damn good actor. i saw mar adentro yesterday, and his performance was pretty rad.
-
House of Games just came out on Criterion late last year. It am awesome.
fo reals? I needs to get some of dat!
Yep
http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=399
-
House of Games just came out on Criterion late last year. It am awesome.
fo reals? I needs to get some of dat!
Yep
http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp?id=399
i love that movie
that and the spanish prisoner are probably my favorite movies of his
but spartan is damn good too
as was heist
hmmmmm
-
pushkin's short play > stupid movie
pushkin :bow
movies :yuck
-
Fuck that, when is Barry Lyndon coming out in HD? :maf
-
Based on the fact that WB totally ignored it and Lolita for high def formats when they released 2001, ACO, EWS, FMJ, and The Shining last year? Probably never.
-
Based on the fact that WB totally ignored it and Lolita for high def formats when they released 2001, ACO, EWS, FMJ, and The Shining last year? Probably never.
I think they are planning a second batch. Why on earth would they ignore Dr. Strangelove?
-
WB doesnt own Strangelove.
-
Oh, wow, I just assumed everything from Lolita on up was WB, but it looks like even Lolita wasn't WB, either.
-
Based on the fact that WB totally ignored it and Lolita for high def formats when they released 2001, ACO, EWS, FMJ, and The Shining last year? Probably never.
They actually re-released Barry Lyndon...except it was the exact same shitty non-anamorphic DVD as before, they just changed the case!
-
Based on the fact that WB totally ignored it and Lolita for high def formats when they released 2001, ACO, EWS, FMJ, and The Shining last year? Probably never.
They actually re-released Barry Lyndon...except it was the exact same shitty non-anamorphic DVD as before, they just changed the case!
I know they re-released it. But not in HD, hence my feelings that WB will continue to ignore it.
-
Based on the fact that WB totally ignored it and Lolita for high def formats when they released 2001, ACO, EWS, FMJ, and The Shining last year? Probably never.
They actually re-released Barry Lyndon...except it was the exact same shitty non-anamorphic DVD as before, they just changed the case!
I know they re-released it. But not in HD, hence my feelings that WB will continue to ignore it.
I think Barry Lyndon might be difficult to remaster, make an anamorphic transfer of, or make HD.
See:
[youtube=425,350]gqkBzaFqcuE[/youtube]
Barry Lyndon was shot with hacked together cameras using lenses that were never meant for film. As the doc says, the lenses had an f-number of 0.7, which is still pretty mind-blowing today. As in there will still still be no cameras with an aperture that wide, and you don't come across photography cameras with apertures that crazy in real life. So my guesses are:
1) The extremely narrow field of view that would be a side effect of using those lenses makes the film look shitty unless it is viewed under very specific conditions (ie. not HD and non-anamorphic).
2) Even if 1 is not the case, there would be very few (probably NO) film techs that would know how to optimize such a bizarrely shot film.
The movie looks great enough that they'd be able to sell it on HD solely on visual hype. I think if they could do an HD transfer, they would have. It's just a technically weirdo film.
-
I don't like any version of Amadeus, Pushkin's M&S included. ptthbbtt!
-
Based on the fact that WB totally ignored it and Lolita for high def formats when they released 2001, ACO, EWS, FMJ, and The Shining last year? Probably never.
They actually re-released Barry Lyndon...except it was the exact same shitty non-anamorphic DVD as before, they just changed the case!
I know they re-released it. But not in HD, hence my feelings that WB will continue to ignore it.
I think Barry Lyndon might be difficult to remaster, make an anamorphic transfer of, or make HD.
See:
[youtube=425,350]gqkBzaFqcuE[/youtube]
Barry Lyndon was shot with hacked together cameras using lenses that were never meant for film. As the doc says, the lenses had an f-number of 0.7, which is still pretty mind-blowing today. As in there will still still be no cameras with an aperture that wide, and you don't come across photography cameras with apertures that crazy in real life. So my guesses are:
1) The extremely narrow field of view that would be a side effect of using those lenses makes the film look shitty unless it is viewed under very specific conditions (ie. not HD and non-anamorphic).
2) Even if 1 is not the case, there would be very few (probably NO) film techs that would know how to optimize such a bizarrely shot film.
The movie looks great enough that they'd be able to sell it on HD solely on visual hype. I think if they could do an HD transfer, they would have. It's just a technically weirdo film.
The remastered DVD looks amazing. In fact I would say it is the most beautiful DVD I've ever seen.
The original cut looked good enough as well.
-
[youtube=425,350]s26nqihrvJY[/youtube]
:bow
-
Based on the fact that WB totally ignored it and Lolita for high def formats when they released 2001, ACO, EWS, FMJ, and The Shining last year? Probably never.
They actually re-released Barry Lyndon...except it was the exact same shitty non-anamorphic DVD as before, they just changed the case!
I know they re-released it. But not in HD, hence my feelings that WB will continue to ignore it.
I think Barry Lyndon might be difficult to remaster, make an anamorphic transfer of, or make HD.
See:
[youtube=425,350]gqkBzaFqcuE[/youtube]
Barry Lyndon was shot with hacked together cameras using lenses that were never meant for film. As the doc says, the lenses had an f-number of 0.7, which is still pretty mind-blowing today. As in there will still still be no cameras with an aperture that wide, and you don't come across photography cameras with apertures that crazy in real life. So my guesses are:
1) The extremely narrow field of view that would be a side effect of using those lenses makes the film look shitty unless it is viewed under very specific conditions (ie. not HD and non-anamorphic).
2) Even if 1 is not the case, there would be very few (probably NO) film techs that would know how to optimize such a bizarrely shot film.
The movie looks great enough that they'd be able to sell it on HD solely on visual hype. I think if they could do an HD transfer, they would have. It's just a technically weirdo film.
The remastered DVD looks amazing. In fact I would say it is the most beautiful DVD I've ever seen.
It's non-anamorphic. It's crap!
-
Amadeus is one of the best films I've ever seen. I haven't seen it in years though
-
The remastered DVD looks amazing. In fact I would say it is the most beautiful DVD I've ever seen.
The original cut looked good enough as well.
There is no remastered DVD. They just took the original release and repackaged it in a new case.
-
[youtube=425,350]s26nqihrvJY[/youtube]
:bow
Fool just hearing this language being spoken gives me an insta boner.