'A Hole in the World'
A place to talk about movies--old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
I thought the film works best if the question is never answered. The distinction becomes meaningless as sufficiently-advanced technology becomes indistinguishable from magic, you know?
Also, Ridley Scott is approaching Lucasfilm levels of tinkering. Let's hope no cute furry beasts show up in the new version.
So this is, what, the eleven millionth version of Blade Runner on DVD now? What's next, just releasing the dailies as a 15-disc special edition?
On a similar note, I hate Disney's "available for a limited time" bullshit. But I may have to break down and buy The Jungle Book when it comes out this week. I do love that movie.
The ambiguity works much better thematicaly, I agree.
So this is, what, the eleven millionth version of Blade Runner on DVD now? What's next, just releasing the dailies as a 15-disc special edition?
Let's hope it never reaches that point.
Can't say that I wouldn't like to see the new levels of digital restoration, I just don't know what more he can add. Unless it's ewoks.
He's going to take out the guns and replace them with walkie-talkies.
Also, Ridley Scott is approaching Lucasfilm levels of tinkering. Let's hope no cute furry beasts show up in the new version.
Unicorns have hair rather than fur, right?
I'm watching my Forbidden Zone dvd AIFG! I just realized I've never seen a tape that wasn't a copy of a copy of a copy. The images are crisp and the sound is clear. I'm so verra happy.
Okay, now after reading the NY Times article on the latest Blade Runner edition I'm curious again.
Also...
The special effects that produced this vision were amazing for their day. Created with miniature models, optics and double exposures, they seemed less artificial than many computer effects of a decade later. But like film stock, they faded with time.
For the new director’s cut, the special-effects footage was digitally scanned at 8,000 lines per frame, four times the resolution of most restorations, and then meticulously retouched. The results look almost 3-D.
I didn't know you could do that with a restoration.
So they didn't pull a Lucas and add more CGI, right? They just made the original special effects look as good as they were meant to?