Theater vs. Home Theater?

[JSE]

I'm talking about movies that are groundbreaking. STAR WARS, despite whatever flaws that anyone feels that this film has, was a groundbreaking film. It was an event that people flocked to. I am not saying that movies these days are NOT good, the ratio of good to bad though is very minute. There are far too many sequels and remakes and just flat out fluff that even the 'good ones's get lost in the shuffle. Take for instance CINDERELLA MAN.

How much more "ground" is there to break? Star Wars was groundbreaking during it's time for it's specials effects. How much farther can special effects go now? That is without becoming animated. CGI is WAY overused these days and it looks fake in a lot of instances.

Indiana Jones was not a groundbreaking film. It was a great film with a great story. Nothing really groundbreaking about it. Same thing with Titianic. I did not see what the big deal was BTW.

My point is this, a good movie is a good movie and there are still plenty of them. I would be interested to see how many movies per year were being released back in the late 70's through 90's compared to now. It seems like we are flooded with movies these days. Finding the good ones just takes a little more effort now.

[PeruvianSkies]

How much more "ground" is there to break? Star Wars was groundbreaking during it's time for it's specials effects. How much farther can special effects go now? That is without becoming animated. CGI is WAY overused these days and it looks fake in a lot of instances.

Indiana Jones was not a groundbreaking film. It was a great film with a great story. Nothing really groundbreaking about it. Same thing with Titianic. I did not see what the big deal was BTW.

My point is this, a good movie is a good movie and there are still plenty of them. I would be interested to see how many movies per year were being released back in the late 70's through 90's compared to now. It seems like we are flooded with movies these days. Finding the good ones just takes a little more effort now.

How much more ground is there to break? Are you kidding me? The film format is 110+ years old at this point and it evolved throughout that entire time. To say that there is nothing else to do with it is just plain nonsense. The format was over 70 years old in the 1970's when they started to do groundbreaking work and the same is true today. Editing techniques, camera techniques, there is still more that can be done to push the envelope and to tell the narrative in a different, unique way. Can you name another format that has lasted so long? You can still take the film stock from a Lumiere Bros film from the early 1900's and still play it in a 35mm projector.

TITANIC was revolutionary in it's scope and depth with the special effects. This is one of the first films that blended live action and special effects together on this scale and this effectively. Of course it's not all about CGI, you can go back to 1958's A NIGHT TO REMEMBER (also about the sinking of the Titanic) and it was also groundbreaking with the use of the camera at various angles to make it appear that the ship was sinking.

I never said that INDIANA JONES was groundbreaking, but it was a movie event. People talked about it when it came out, it was a huge buzz film, people went multiple times to see it, it made an impression on people and is still a fan favorite to this day.

STAR WARS revolutionized more than just SPECIAL EFFECTS...it revolutionized sound design for films, it was a counterculture space opera with loads of imagination and the marketing for this film including collectables, memorabilia, etc etc have also become legendary as well. This was one of the first films to be such and has been imitated and copied so many times since then it's rediculous. It wasn't like it didn't have competition in the Sci Fi world either...that same year CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND was released. I am not even a big STAR WARS fan, but I know the facts about it and know it's importance to the contribution of cinema and the 70's.

[Smokey]

TITANIC was revolutionary in it's scope and depth with the special effects. This is one of the first films that blended live action and special effects together on this scale and this effectively.

That might be, but the movie was a bore and overrated. They turned what could have been a moving story about the greatest ship of all time, but they ruined it and made it into a sappy love story.

Some people call Titanic an over budget Love Boat TV show

[JSE]

How much more ground is there to break? Are you kidding me? The film format is 110+ years old at this point and it evolved throughout that entire time. To say that there is nothing else to do with it is just plain nonsense.

Am I Kidding? Nope. Think about it. Let's take a Charlie Chaplin film. No sound, B&W, low frame rate, etc. Now think about your favorite, T2. That's an amazing leep in "Groundbreaking-ness" to say the least. How much father can we really go in terms of sound quality, video quality? HD is pretty darn amazing. How much farther can we go beyond HD? Do you think the next advance in video and sound format will be groundbreaking? Do you think it will be a huge leap? I guess the next big step might be a virtual type experience. Who knows? But the largest advances in audio and video have been made. I can see how improvements will be made but will it be Charlie to T2 improvements.

I'm just saying thta in terms of the up till now life of film/video and audio, the biggest leaps in quality have already been made. I'm talking in terms of non-animation of of course. I can see how there is still alot more "groundbreaking-ness' left in animation.

Now something groundbreaking would be to hook shock devices up to rude people in theaters. They get out of line........ ZAP! JSE would be a happy movie going camper once again. And that's what it's really about is it not? Keeping JSE happy!

Now off to watch LOST!

JSE

[PeruvianSkies]

Am I Kidding? Nope. Think about it. Let's take a Charlie Chaplin film. No sound, B&W, low frame rate, etc. Now think about your favorite, T2. That's an amazing leep in "Groundbreaking-ness" to say the least. How much father can we really go in terms of sound quality, video quality? HD is pretty darn amazing. How much farther can we go beyond HD? Do you think the next advance in video and sound format will be groundbreaking? Do you think it will be a huge leap? I guess the next big step might be a virtual type experience. Who knows? But the largest advances in audio and video have been made. I can see how improvements will be made but will it be Charlie to T2 improvements.

I'm just saying thta in terms of the up till now life of film/video and audio, the biggest leaps in quality have already been made. I'm talking in terms of non-animation of of course. I can see how there is still alot more "groundbreaking-ness' left in animation.

Now something groundbreaking would be to hook shock devices up to rude people in theaters. They get out of line........ ZAP! JSE would be a happy movie going camper once again. And that's what it reallt about is it not? Keeping JSE happy!

Now off to watch LOST!

JSE

So according to you a film needs to be of better quality in terms of picture and sound in order to be groundbreaking....what about camera technique, editing, sound design, integration of live action and cartoon/animation, new film formats, mixed genres, new narrative structures, etc etc etc.

[JSE]

So according to you a film needs to be of better quality in terms of picture and sound in order to be groundbreaking....what about camera technique, editing, sound design, integration of live action and cartoon/animation, new film formats, mixed genres, new narrative structures, etc etc etc.

Don't all those, except for the last two, fit under Audio/Video? And no, I never said that but you did elude to that in your statement,

"Editing techniques, camera techniques, there is still more that can be done to push the envelope and to tell the narrative in a different, unique way."

that's what I was responding to.

I guess my point is this. Granted we have gone off topic here but,

I think the largest most significant advances in film/movie/audio have already been made. Will there be new formats, new "narrative structures", new "mixed genres"? Sure there will be. But to what extent? Will they be groundbreaking?

[kexodusc]

Don't all those, except for the last two, fit under Audio/Video? And no, I never said that but you did elude to that in your statement,

"Editing techniques, camera techniques, there is still more that can be done to push the envelope and to tell the narrative in a different, unique way."

that's what I was responding to.

I guess my point is this. Granted we have gone off topic here but,

I think the largest most significant advances in film/movie/audio have already been made. Will there be new formats, new "narrative structures", new "mixed genres"? Sure there will be. But to what extent? Will they be groundbreaking?

Pfff, forget you JSE, I'm still waiting for "surround vision" © , virtual reality, or at least 3-D to take the experience up a level...

[Kam]

....new "mixed genres"? Sure there will be. But to what extent? Will they be groundbreaking?

mainstream hollywood movies and porn. groundbreaking? i dunno, but eva, jessica, and me in that first ever movie will be nice

[JSE]

mainstream hollywood movies and porn. groundbreaking? i dunno, but eva, jessica, and me in that first ever movie will be nice

Which Jessica?

[PeruvianSkies]

Don't all those, except for the last two, fit under Audio/Video? And no, I never said that but you did elude to that in your statement,

"Editing techniques, camera techniques, there is still more that can be done to push the envelope and to tell the narrative in a different, unique way."

that's what I was responding to.

I guess my point is this. Granted we have gone off topic here but,

I think the largest most significant advances in film/movie/audio have already been made. Will there be new formats, new "narrative structures", new "mixed genres"? Sure there will be. But to what extent? Will they be groundbreaking?

I knew when I said 'Sound Design' that you would probably try to say that falls into the picture/sound category, but what I am referring to here is NOT the playback quality, but the key word: design of the film's sound in terms of how the sound enhances the narrative structure. There are many films that use sound as narrative cues for instance, which does not really have to do with the quality of that sound, but rather the score, soundtrack, on-set sound effects, off-set sound effects, etc etc etc. If you are familiar with the film THE PASSENGER starring Jack Nicholson there is a brilliant scene in which Jack is playing back a tape that he recorded of himself earlier. As he is listening the camera moves to where we are unable to see Jack and then when he reappears we have gone back in time to where he is recording the message. This is a brilliant transition using non-diagetic sound in order to build a certain narrative structure. There are many other instances of how the sound design can be used to also contribute to the overall narrative of the film, but I don't think I need to go into how important the overall sound (not quality necessarily) of a film is vital to the films overall impact.

[JSE]

figures you would think that...

Oh, please forgive my lack of knowledge about "Sound Design".

I knew when I said 'Sound Design' that you would probably try to say that falls into the picture/sound category, but what I am referring to here is NOT the playback quality, but the key word: design of the film's sound in terms of how the sound enhances the narrative structure. There are many films that use sound as narrative cues for instance, which does not really have to do with the quality of that sound, but rather the score, soundtrack, on-set sound effects, off-set sound effects, etc etc etc. If you are familiar with the film THE PASSENGER starring Jack Nicholson there is a brilliant scene in which Jack is playing back a tape that he recorded of himself earlier. As he is listening the camera moves to where we are unable to see Jack and then when he reappears we have gone back in time to where he is recording the message. This is a brilliant transition using non-diagetic sound in order to build a certain narrative structure. There are many other instances of how the sound design can be used to also contribute to the overall narrative of the film, but I don't think I need to go into how important the overall sound (not quality necessarily) of a film is vital to the films overall impact.

Um........yeah, that's still covered by Audio.

Check please!

JSE

[PeruvianSkies]

Am I Kidding? Nope. Think about it. Let's take a Charlie Chaplin film. No sound, B&W, low frame rate, etc. Now think about your favorite, T2. That's an amazing leep in "Groundbreaking-ness" to say the least. How much father can we really go in terms of sound quality, video quality? HD is pretty darn amazing. How much farther can we go beyond HD? Do you think the next advance in video and sound format will be groundbreaking? Do you think it will be a huge leap? I guess the next big step might be a virtual type experience. Who knows? But the largest advances in audio and video have been made. I can see how improvements will be made but will it be Charlie to T2 improvements.


JSE

Here is your post regarding "sound quality and video quality", which are not the same as "sound design" or "cinematography". Quality obviously has an important part in those areas, but you are referring to their quality during playback, which is different. The Oscars has categories for Best Sound Design and Best Cinematography, they don't have Oscars for Best DVD Audio/Video Quality.

The point here is that when we are talking about groundbreaking there are still many new things that can be done. How much better can video quality get? Well, when people first saw Laserdisc they thought it was the BEST EVER, then DVD trumped that a few years later, and now people are realizing that DVD isn't so hot when comared to HD material. So you never know how much better it can go. I can still see areas where HD still cannot compete with true film. Mostly in the color fidelity, depth, black levels, white levels, and saturation. HD is sharp and refined, but those other areas are equally important.

From Chaplin to T2...yes, far leap...very far, and when T2 was released the special effects were incredible. They still hold up fairly well after 16 years, but looking back you can still see how current special effects (when done right) can look better. CGI is quite different though as it often looks too 'digital' or 'fake' looking. Even LORD OF THE RINGS...5 years later looks dated with it's digital work.

There are still many advancements that can be made...it just takes the people who believe in them to make them happen instead of lazy people who think everything falls into the 'been there done that' category. Here's your T-shirt!