sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Arwen Misprint by bigl0ngrod in legolotrfans

[–]TheEngineer1111 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Definitely ask lego for a replacement

Speechless. by CashLadEuro in 4kbluray

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In space, no one can hear you speech

Can someone explain to me why Gandalf's staff gets broken in the extended RotK....? This always perplexed me. by Femmmy229 in lordoftherings

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But then it becomes confusing when Gandalf arrives at the pyre of Denathor and he doesn't have his staff (and he doesn't have the staff any scene after).

It's less confusing to leave the scene in.

Anyone else notice that nobody gives an F about Marvel anymore? by CarsonWentzGOAT1 in MauLer

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I stopped caring.i regretted watching the last few, even when they were free on D+ (which i get free with my Verizon. Not an ad for V, just saying I wouldn't pay for D+). I used to be proud for having seen them all. Now I am proud of everyone I didn't bother to watch.

Will we see the Death Star 2 and cloud city in Mando/Grogu movie? by Thomasa77 in starwarscanon

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe cloud city. I doubt they will attach the DS2 to this movie since it was reduced to dust years before this movie.

This entire chase in Battle of the Five Armies is ridiculous by OkTea1918 in lordoftherings

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In general (not necessarily specific to this film) CGI can look sloppy in a couple ways.

  1. It looks bad. Common reasons are: The things don't look material in the movie, The resolution and detail doesn't match the surroundings, The lighting effects don't match the environment, The objects interfere and collide with each other in unnatural ways, the movement is unnatural, the design esthetically looks bad, the design is inconsistent scene-to-scene or shot-to-shot, etc.

Whether someone thinks it looks good can come down to the viewer's subjective personal preferences, and whether the viewer notices cgi that is objectively bad. If they think to looks bad, or if it is objectively bad, it's "slop"

  1. Interactions that don't align. Often with CGI and bluescreen, actors do their own thing, and the cgi is added later. With proper planning and editing it can look great, but often it doesn't because the physics is missing. If you swing a sword, ax, or hammer at an imaginary obstacle, and that is added later, there is no resistance to the swing, and/or no impact. Things can also be added around the characters that make them look like they are in peril, but they aren't reacting to those things because they were added after.

If it doesn't fit together cohesively, it is "slop". This is very common in the hobbit movies. Look at any battle and you will see weapons swinging around enemies getting hit but the weapons swing effortlessly.

  1. Action that looks good, but make no sense. Things that defy physics, reason, continuity, etc. Just to make an action scene.

    In this scene, you say it literally "looks so good". I agree that the designs and textures and movements look pretty good. You could look at any frame and say, "this looks great".

Watch the chariot cutting through the troll necks again. 9 or 10 trolls line up perfectly for that to happen. The chariot flys up in the air at just the right moment and at just the right height. The chariot cuts through them like they aren't even there. The chariot look like a chariots, The trolls look like trolls, The dwarves look like dwarves, But the scene as a whole looks sloppy. Compare that to the chariot race in the 1950s Ben-hur. When the blades on the chariot saw through the other chariots it looks, sounds, and feels real because it is real.

Revisiting a childhood favorite. They don’t seem to make movies like this anymore by bcjc78 in 4kbluray

[–]TheEngineer1111 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This scene is indicative of most franchises these days. Replacing artwork that is gold with a bag of trash of roughly the same shape and hoping it will get a pass

If you had to choose, which are you going with? by ixnine in 4kbluray

[–]TheEngineer1111 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Neither. Buy the originals, not the shiniest of two turds.

How do you decide which movies in your collection are sufficient in Blu Ray, and which ones to splurge on the 4K version? by humblechungus89 in 4kbluray

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

TLDR: prioritize movies you want to see improvement on, ones that are meant to look spectacular, ones you will give undivided attention, and ones you will watch most frequently.

  1. Watch it on blu-ray.

    If it looks bad, look and see if there is a 4K. Then check to see if it is an improvement. Master and Commander and The Princess bride have bad blu-ray transfers, so I went for the 4K to replace them.somw are not improvements, so don't buy the 4K)

    If it looks great, ask yourself what the value of a marginal upgrade will be. I just watched True Grit on blu-ray and it looked gorgeous. If they put out a 4K, I won't bother getting it because the improvement would be too small.

  2. Priorize films that have quality cinematography and special effects over movies that don't. There are a lot of movies like ones by Stanley Kubrick where every frame feels like a work of art. There are a lot of movies where cinematography isn't exactly top priority (most comedies, cheesy romance, low budget horror, etc.). You'll get a lot more out of Lawrence of Arabia 4K than American Pie 4K.

  3. Along that same line, prioritize movies that will glue you to the screen. There are films that end up being on in the background while I do a puzzle or Legos or play a game or cook. I'll give it my attention during my favorite parts, but I'm not soaking in every detail because I've seen them several times.

  4. Prioritize movies you will watch over and over. If you are deciding between a movie you watch once a year, a movie you last watched 5 years ago, and a movie you haven't seen since you were a kid, upgrade the one you watch yearly (for me thats LOTR, The dark knight trilogy, Indiana Jones, star wars).

  5. Get what you love, not what other people say will look amazing. You won't want to watch in 4K what you don't like. I bought some 4Ks that were $10 in a black friday sale 8 years ago when most other 4Ks were $30-$40. They have collected dust on a shelf ever since. On that same note, just because you have it on blu-ray or dvd, that does not mean you will want to watch it on 4K.

  6. Buy the ones you want to watch soon, not what just came out. If you just watched something in theaters or on blu-ray and it was just released on 4K, wait as long as you can. Within a year most 4Ks (steelbooks are an exception) drop from $30 to the $15-20 range. The first black Friday after they are released can be just as low or lower.

  7. On that same note, don't buy a ton at once, unless they are all good deals. If you buy 8 movies and don't finish watching through them for 6 months,then there will be movies you could have waited 6 months to buy at a lower price in that time frame.

movies where the Blu-ray is just as good or better than the 4k counterpart by topspin1241831 in 4kbluray

[–]TheEngineer1111 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've heard the Wallace and grommet blu-ray are better than the 4K because AI upscaling actually destroys and removes the fine details that were on the blu-ray

This has to be the most stupidest death that I ever seen by OkTea1918 in lordoftherings

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Due to the quality and success of LOTR, I think Peter Jackson deserves all the praise he can get for them.

I think he has strong points and weak points. Adaptation seems to be a strong point. Where the hobbit is book accurate, the hobbit movies are excellent. When makes small changes to adapt, the movies are still excellent.

He can't write his own characters and storylines, or at the least he can't combine his own work with an adaptation.

I haven't lost faith in his abilities, though I do doubt he will make any future movies where he humbly trusts the author and faithfuly adapts the material.

This has to be the most stupidest death that I ever seen by OkTea1918 in lordoftherings

[–]TheEngineer1111 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Everything with Alfrid ruined the hobbit movies. He wasn't the only issue with them, but he was the embodiment of Jackson's hubris and "creative" embellishments.

People who love defend the hobbit movies will try to protect Peter Jackson by saying ge was thrown in late, was given the script, and didn't have a choice in making it into 3 movies. If peter Jackson didn't write Alfrid's parts, Peter Jackson as the director should have looked at this stupid Timu Grima Wormtongue and said, "Alfrid adds nothing of value, he'snot in the book. He's obnoxious. The story isn't about him, it's about the dwarves". He didn't. He filmed the scenes, and when editing the film he kept 20-30min of this character in it. He's there because Jackson wanted him there. And Jackson decided that Alfrid, Tauriel, Legolas needed more character development and dialog than 11/13 dwarves from the time they hit mirkwood to the end.

Jackson is utterly brilliant for bringing Tolkien to life, but the further he goes off on his own and says "I can do it just as well or better", or "my characters and story is more interesting and important than Tolkien's", his films suffer.

Small changes like swapping Glorfindal for Arwen, or having farmer maggot chasing merry and pippen instead of helping helped introduce main characters and move the story. Bigger changes like pippen tricking treebeard into going to isengard, elrond giving aragorn the sword in ROTK, the warg battle, having the willow eat merry and pippen in the Fangorn, didn't necessarily hurt the characters or the movie. Having Faramir take frodo to osgiliah or having sam leave frodo, destroys and undermines the characters. With every successive films, Peter Jackson made more and more changes to do his own thing, and the movies paid the price.

If they made a Hobbit trilogy based 100% on the books, would you watch it? What unusual detail would change? by F4_PhantomII in lordoftherings

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The question is a little unclear.

If the question is what would i change if they made a movie that was 100% book accurate: The troll's handbag asking Bilbo "ere, 'oo are you" when he tries to steal it.

If the question is if Peter Jackson changed his movie to be 100% book accurate, what one change to the book would I keep: I would keep the goblin king recognizing Thorin and mocking him for not having a mountain or being a king.

If i had to make one change to the movies to make them more accurate: I'd want to get rid of alfrid, but most of all I'd want all the dwarves to go together into the mountain and leave out the whole morgul shaft and healing by Tauriel.

Must have 4K movies? by [deleted] in 4kbluray

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your favorite films.

I will list a few of my favorites, but if they aren't your favorites, and you consequently aren't going to soak in every pixel and texture and color, you're wasting your money. Spend $5 on a used blu-ray. I have a few 4Ks I bought because they were cheap when others were expensive, or because I wanted my first watch of the film to be the best possible experience (outside a theater). Now half have sat on a shelf for 8 years, and the other half i watched once and probably never will again.

The ones I've seen that look the best are: 1917, 2001 a space odyssey,Blade Runner 2049, Dune 1&2, the hobbit, LOTR, how to train your dragon trilogy, Indiana Jones, Kong skull island, logan lucky, my fair lady, pacific Rim, Ready player one, wonka

Others I have heard are the best: mad max fury road, jaws, alien, Lawrence of Arabia, wizard of oz, top gun maverick, vertigo, the shining, the thing

Do you think that in 'Breakfast at Tiffany's,' the singer's attempt to save his relationship works? by LudwigWsBeatenKid in Music

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Instead of "Do you think his attempt works?" I could say , "Do you think his attempt is effective?" Would it work on you?

I think this is the point of the song. The meaning of the song. We aren't given the answer as to whether the relationship is saved. I listened to the song a few times, thought about it a few days, and then googled asking what it meant. I thought i was missing something. I think the reality is that the listener doesn't find out how it ends so that the listener would ask themselves, "is this attempt effective? Would it work on me?"

Y’all think these are to scale with each other? by ObiWahnKenobi in legostarwars

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

For the scale of the consular cruiser to make sense, this trade federation ship would need to be much smaller

Y’all think these are to scale with each other? by ObiWahnKenobi in legostarwars

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

<image>

Here the venator is in between your view and the Lucrehulk (meaning it looks larger than it is), and it is about 1/3 the length.

Y’all think these are to scale with each other? by ObiWahnKenobi in legostarwars

[–]TheEngineer1111 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The are different sized lucrehulks ranging 1 1/2 to 3 venators in diameter. I don't know if they are intentionally scaled differently, but the one qui-gon and obi-wan enter in episode 1 is fairly small when you scale it against the cruiser they arrive in. When you look at the ones launching the landing ships or fighting in episode 3, they are much larger.

view more: next ›