What is your favorite Movie Genre?
1: Action
2: Animation
3: Comedy
4: Family
5: Horror
6: Musical
7: Romance
8: War
9: Adventure
10: Biography
11: Crime
12: Drama
13: Fantasy
14: SCI-FI WINNER!!
15: Thriller
KK4QBN wrote to All <=-
Sci-Fi won by a landslide with 72%!
And the industry hasn't been doing SF series well lately. The Expanse is a refreshing change - a new series that's actually quite good. As for movies, there's been some good SF and a lot of crap lately.
And the industry hasn't been doing SF series well lately. The Expanse is a refreshing change - a new series that's actually quite good. As for movies, there's been some good SF and a lot of crap lately.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I wouldn't mind seeing a good sci-fi TV show, but indeed, I haven't
seen many of those lately. I used to like Star Trek when it was on TV
(The Next Generation was my favorite), and more recently I watched
Fringe on Netflix and enjoyed that. But otherwise, it seems like
sci-fi has dropped off in recent years. I suppose it would have to be because there are fewer people who enjoy sci-fi TV these days, but I'd
be surprised if that was the case..
Deepthaw wrote to Vk3jed <=-
It's been a Sci-Fi rennaisance of late, IMHO. Moon, Source Code,
District 9, Looper, Arrival, Gravity, Interstellar, the new Apes
movies, just to name those that come to mind.
Have you seen The Expanse? That is quite good. I'm looking forward to seeing season 3, the first 2 were awesome.
Star Trek was a classic. I've enjoyed all series, and looking forward to watching Discovery on Netflix.
What is your favorite Movie Genre?
Sci-Fi won by a landslide with 72%!
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I haven't seen The Expanse. I might have to check it out..
Star Trek was a classic. I've enjoyed all series, and looking forward to watching Discovery on Netflix.
I'm curious to watch Discovery, but unfortunatley, I heard Netflix
won't be carrying it in the US (where I live). If I want to watch it,
I'd have to sign up for CBS All Access and pay about $6/month for that, which I'm not sure I want to do just for one show. I suppose I could probably find other ways to watch Discovery.. I wish they'd just show
it on over-the-air TV like they did with all the other Star Trek TV
shows. I don't mind having commercials so much.
Also, I have mixed feelings about the direction they've taken with Star Trek. It seems they keep making prequels (and Discovery takes place
before the original series). I'd like to see a new Star Trek show that takes place either after the events of Voyager and Nemesis, or perhaps covering some of the period between the original series and the Next Generation. There's about 70 years between the original series and the Next Generation, and they've only shown the Enterprise B and C each
just once. It would be interesting to see more of either of those
ships and their missions.
Yes. Even continuong on from Enterprise would be interesting, because that series stopped just short of the Romulan war, which would have been interesting to see on the TV. But yes, you're right, there's a lot of untold stories between ToS and TNG, and no oubt more after TNG. I'd also like to see the alternate timeline of the newer (post 2009) movies "undone". :)
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Yeah, it would have been interesting to see more of Enterprise. I
didn't like season 3 much, but I thought it got better again in season
4 and was fairly interesting. And I also wouldn't mind seeing the
2009+ timeline undone. I think those movies are fun to watch though,
but I like classic Star Trek better. I don't think they needed to re-invent it. I suppose it's good for them to get a new fanbase, but
it makes me wonder what was wrong with classic Star Trek to have made people lose interest in it (so they say). They could have also made movies with the Deep Space 9 and Voyager casts, but nope.
The first 2 were good as movies, but didn't feel like "Star Trek", except that the casting was done very well, to capture the essence of the original characters. Thought the last one was a bit "ho hum". Would have made a good TV episode, but wasn't really a movie. So not bad, but doesn't feel like Star Trek. Oh, and you can't kill off Vulcan! :D
I don't think people lost interest in Star Trek, I think the studios wanted to grab the bigger "mainstream" market. Personally, I prefer some level of market segmentation. Quality sci fi will give reliable income for decades, fodder for the masses will fade away rapidly after a big initial bang.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Yeah, I think the casting is very good in the new Star Trek movies.
And I agree about Vulcan - It seems strange to have a Star Trek without the Vulcan home world.
I like that they remastered Star Trek: The Next Generation in blu-ray -
I think the show looks great in that format. I keep hoping that
they'll do that to Voyager and Deep Space 9, but I've heard not enough people bought the Next Generation blu-rays for them to go ahead with
DS9 and Voyager. I've also heard that the special effects in DS9 would
We just saw that as a money grab for little effort, never bothered buying the remastered version. We have the original DVD release of the original 1960s version. Guess we're purists. :) I have seen some stills from the remastered TOS. They do look good and think I caught an episode on TV once, but not a compelling reason to buy them.
I like that they remastered Star Trek: The Next Generation in
blu-ray - I think the show looks great in that format. I keep
hoping that
We just saw that as a money grab for little effort, never bothered buying the remastered version. We have the original DVD release of the original 1960s version. Guess we're purists. :) I have seen some stills from the remastered TOS. They do look good and think I caught an episode on TV once, but not a compelling reason to buy them.
Yeah, multiple remasterings isn't really the way I want to go, as far as I'm concerned. I'm one for new stories.
step with the blu-rays - The blu-rays default to showing you a 4:3 image even on a wide-screen 16:9 TV.
I remember seeing this page - http://cargocollective.com/nickacosta/star-trek-in-cinerama
Where they'd stitched together frames to make widescreen images of the old series -- very cool.
Deepthaw wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The Star Trek TNG remaster is beautiful. They did a huge amount of work (they went back to the original film elements and redid a huge amount
of the effects work.)
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I don't think it was little effort to make the remasters.. From what I heard, it sounded like it actually took quite a bit of work. I saw
some info on the TNG high-def remaster, and they had to basically
re-scan the original film in high definition (itself a fairly time-consuming task, as they'd have to re-scan each frame), and then
they touched up the colors and also re-did some of the effects in some scenes - for instance, to make things like planets and phaser fire look better, etc.. I can imagine it would be fairly labor-intensive doing
that frame by frame. I'm sure some computer automation was probably involved for some of it where possible though.
Also, I didn't previously own any of it on DVD, so I figured I might as well buy the high-def versions. I do know someone who has TNG on DVD though, and one thing I've noticed about those particular DVDs is that
on a modern wide-screen TV, the (square) picture is stretched out to
fill the whole screen by default. It's still watchable, but it ends up stretching the image horizontally. You can change the TV setting to
tell it you're watching a 4:3 image rather than 16:9, but you don't
have to do that extra step with the blu-rays - The blu-rays default to showing you a 4:3 image even on a wide-screen 16:9 TV.
Yeah, multiple remasterings isn't really the way I want to go, as far as I'm concerned. I'm one for new stories.
I know what you mean.. Usually I'd rather not re-buy new remasters all the time, but I've noticed standard-definition content tends to look a little fuzzy on a high-definition TV. Sometimes it's nice to see even
an older TV show with a sharp image quality.
I saw some info on the TNG high-def remaster, and they had to
basically re-scan the original film in high definition (itself a
fairly time-consuming task, as they'd have to re-scan each frame),
and then they touched up the colors and also re-did some of the
effects in some scenes - for instance, to make things like planets
and phaser fire look better, etc.. I can imagine it would be fairly
labor-intensive doing that frame by frame. I'm sure some computer
automation was probably involved for some of it where possible
though.
You're likely right, just there seems to be this lack of creativity in Hollywood in recent decades - reboots, remakes and remasters, mostly techical "upgrades", but no real new storytelling.
blu-rays - The blu-rays default to showing you a 4:3 image even on a
wide-screen 16:9 TV.
We were early to get all DVDs. As for the aspect ration thing, that is your player. Older DVD players don't handle aspect ratio well, and stretch 4:3 to the whole screen. Blu-Ray players seem to be smarter, and will show a 4:3 DVD correctly, not just Blu-Ray discs.
I can live with that. Technology changes. Reminds me of the controversy of colouring black and white movies. :)
Re: Re: Favorite Movie Genre
By: Vk3jed to Nightfox on Sat Jul 08 2017 06:13 pm
We just saw that as a money grab for little effort, never bothered buying the remastered version. We have the original DVD release of the original 1960s version. Guess we're purists. :) I have seen some stills from the remastered TOS. They do look good and think I caught an episode on TV once, but not a compelling reason to buy them.
The Star Trek TNG remaster is beautiful. They did a huge amount of work (they went back to the original film elements and redid a huge amount of the effects work.)
Check out some of the remastered TNG episodes on Netflix, it's fantastic.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I agree that it's always good to have new storytelling. However, technology also progresses, and we have bigger & better TVs than we
used to have. I think it's good to have my favorite content in a
format that looks its best on today's technology.
I actually haven't tried many 4:3 DVDs with my blu-ray player.. I have
a fairly recent blu-ray player that may in fact be smart about it, as you've pointed out..
I can live with that. Technology changes. Reminds me of the controversy of colouring black and white movies. :)
:) I think that's a slightly different debate.. I can see both sides
of it too. A black & white video can be colorized any way they want - They could add really odd colors if they wanted to.. So in a way, I suppose colorizing could be potentially harmful. But if it's done with realistic colors, I suppose it would add an interesting element to a
black & white movie. Sometimes in the past, I had tried watching black
& white video for a while and then watching color, and it feels like
night vs. day - So much difference to see something in color after
seeing black & white for a while. It feels more complete, in a way..
i dont care about the special effects or it looking better. maybe george lucas does.
i care about the story.
Deepthaw wrote to Mro <=-
i dont care about the special effects or it looking better. maybe george lucas does.
i care about the story.
A lot of us enjoy the story in TNG enough that we like to watch it
again. Having it available in a format that doesn't look bad on our
HDTVs is just gravy.
i care about the story.
A lot of us enjoy the story in TNG enough that we like to watch it
again. Having it available in a format that doesn't look bad on our
HDTVs is just gravy.
I'm inclined to agree with Mro on this one. While effects are nice, the story is what matters to me, and I don't mind that older shows don't have the same resolution or effects as my TV. I'd rather see new stories created, than just making the old ones look better all the time.
I'm inclined to agree with Mro on this one. While effects are nice, the story is what matters to me, and I don't mind that older shows don't have the same resolution or effects as my TV. I'd rather see new stories created, than just making the old ones look better all the time.
I'm inclined to agree with Mro on this one. While effects are nice, the story is what matters to me, and I don't mind that older shows don't have the same resolution or effects as my TV. I'd rather see new stories created, than just making the old ones look better all the time.
Re: Re: Favorite Movie Genre
By: Vk3jed to Deepthaw on Sun Jul 09 2017 08:07 pm
I'm inclined to agree with Mro on this one. While effects are nice, the story is what matters to me, and I don't mind that older shows don't have the same resolution or effects as my TV. I'd rather see new stories created, than just making the old ones look better all the time.
I can definitely understand that sentiment, but I also have several younger friends who are watching Star Trek for the first time, and the improved picture quality definitely makes it easier for them to handle. I know the remaster piqued my interest enough to start rewatching TNG again from the beginning.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I do think the story is more important - but if the image quality can
be improved to look better on modern equipment, why not? I think the
medium/format of the story contributes to how the story is experienced.
A book wouldn't need its picture enhanced because it has no picture,
but for something made from the get-go to be watched on TV, I think the visuals carry some of the details that are part of the story - In this case, how the characters look, the overall look and design of the ships
& technology, how the planets look, etc. Those are things that could be described if the show were in the form a book, but it's not; it's a TV show. So I think there is some merit to having it look as good as possible. The DVDs are watchable on a modern high-definition TV, but
the high-definition remasters do look better.
Deepthaw wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I can definitely understand that sentiment, but I also have several younger friends who are watching Star Trek for the first time, and the improved picture quality definitely makes it easier for them to handle.
I know the remaster piqued my interest enough to start rewatching TNG again from the beginning.
Mro wrote to Vk3jed <=-
when i saw the starwars movies remade and changed in the theaters, i
came to the realization that i dont care about special effects at the
cost of changing something that shouldnt be changed.
Mro wrote to Vk3jed <=-
when i saw the starwars movies remade and changed in the theaters, i came to the realization that i dont care about special effects at the cost of changing something that shouldnt be changed.
I'm not sure I've actually seen the originals, because I was a kid and there was no cinema in town back then. I had to settle for reading the book. I did see the remastered Star Wars movies in the cinema when they were released, as my opportunity to finally watch them.
I do think the story is more important - but if the image quality
can be improved to look better on modern equipment, why not? I
think the
To me, it looks like an attempt to screw more money out of consumers for relatively little effort (don't need script writers, actors, directors, etc). The technical staff needed for the remastering would also be used in producing new content for effects, etc.
Sure they look better, but is that the best use of the industry's time and money?
I hadn't read or even heard of the books that The Expanse is based on, until it aired.
Guess we agree to disagree. Haven't needed a remaster to watch Star Trek for the umteenth time. ;)
when i saw the starwars movies remade and changed in the theaters, i
came to the realization that i dont care about special effects at
the cost of changing something that shouldnt be changed.
I'm not sure I've actually seen the originals, because I was a kid and there was no cinema in town back then. I had to settle for reading the book. I did see the remastered Star Wars movies in the cinema when they were released, as my opportunity to finally watch them.
i'd have to watch the original and 'remastered' version side by side to see if it is worth it.
Sure they look better, but is that the best use of the industry's time and money? I'm actually quite over a lot of Hollywood, it just seems so
Mro wrote to Vk3jed <=-
you can download the originals, and you can even get the originals with the cut parts added back in.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I still think quite a bit of effort goes into a remaster like they did with Star Trek TNG. Personally, given the choice, I'd rather watch the high-def versions than the lower-def versions.. They do look nice.
I'm sure they could hire more people to work on this kind of thing if
they needed to. I imagine there are probably plenty of newcomers in
the industry who can do remaster work. As far as money, I think it all comes down to what customers are willing to spend their money on - So
in the end, I think it's consumers' spending money that will determine whether a remaster effort is worth it.
Do you feel that it's a waste of effort & money in general to release existing movies in new higher-definition formats? What about older
movies that you like? There are older movies that have good visuals
that I think can benefit from a higher-definiton release. For instance
- 2001: A Space Odyssey, Tron, Blade Runner, The Matrix, etc.. Those
movies, and others that existed before blu-ray, I think can benefit
from a high-definition release. I don't think it's all wasted effort.
As video resolutions keep getting better, videos recorded in lower resolutions will keep looking progressively worse (on higher resolution screens). I suppose I don't necessarily want to keep spending money on new versions of the same movie all the time, but it's nice to have a crisp, clear image when watching a movie or TV show.
I hadn't read or even heard of the books that The Expanse is based on, until it aired.
Would you believe I had never heard of Lord Of The Rings until the
movie came out in 2001?
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The older versions of Star Trek (on DVD etc.) are definitely
watchable.. I think they do look better on blu-ray though. I hadn't owned a copy of The Next Generation, so when the blu-rays started being released, I opted to buy those rather than the DVDs.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The Star Wars movies were played on TV quite a bit though.. Did you
never have a chance to watch them on TV? Also, I was not aware the
Star Wars movies were made into book form..
Deepthaw wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The remastering work was largely outsourced and paid for itself in disc sales and licensing to Netflix, so it's not like it a major strain on Viacom/CBS that kept them from working on other stuff.
I think a remaster can be a good thing to pump out to keep interest in
the francise fresh when you're between installments.
Re: Re: Favorite Movie Genre
By: Vk3jed to Deepthaw on Sun Jul 09 2017 08:07 pm
I'm inclined to agree with Mro on this one. While effects are nice, the story is what matters to me, and I don't mind that older shows don't ha the same resolution or effects as my TV. I'd rather see new stories created, than just making the old ones look better all the time.
I can definitely understand that sentiment, but I also have several younger friends who are watching Star Trek for the first time, and the improved pict quality definitely makes it easier for them to handle. I know the remaster piqued my interest enough to start rewatching TNG again from the beginning.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I do think the story is more important - but if the image quality can be improved to look better on modern equipment, why not? I think the
To me, it looks like an attempt to screw more money out of consumers for relatively little effort (don't need script writers, actors, directors, etc) The technical staff needed for the remastering would also be used in produci new content for effects, etc.
medium/format of the story contributes to how the story is experienced.
A book wouldn't need its picture enhanced because it has no picture, but for something made from the get-go to be watched on TV, I think the visuals carry some of the details that are part of the story - In this case, how the characters look, the overall look and design of the ships & technology, how the planets look, etc. Those are things that could be described if the show were in the form a book, but it's not; it's a TV show. So I think there is some merit to having it look as good as possible. The DVDs are watchable on a modern high-definition TV, but the high-definition remasters do look better.
Sure they look better, but is that the best use of the industry's time and money? I'm actually quite over a lot of Hollywood, it just seems so unimaginitive these days - endless remakes, remasters, etc. As for TV serie I found The Expanse to be a refreshing change, something new to TV, and quit well done. And Netflix allows this sort of content to be easily distributed (legaly!). Looking forward to seeing the next season. The Expanse is a reminder that there are many great books that would make for good TV or cine
I hadn't read or even heard of the books that The Expanse is based on, unti it aired.
... Borg Burgers: We do it our way; your way is irrelevant.
Re: Re: Favorite Movie Genre
By: Vk3jed to Mro on Mon Jul 10 2017 09:21 am
when i saw the starwars movies remade and changed in the theaters, i
came to the realization that i dont care about special effects at
the cost of changing something that shouldnt be changed.
I'm not sure I've actually seen the originals, because I was a kid and there was no cinema in town back then. I had to settle for reading the book. I did see the remastered Star Wars movies in the cinema when they were released, as my opportunity to finally watch them.
The Star Wars movies were played on TV quite a bit though.. Did you never h a chance to watch them on TV? Also, I was not aware the Star Wars movies we made into book form..
Nightfox
True. I'm willing to look at the remastered versions if there's a way to do it (Netflix?), just don't want to have to pay for them, since I have already paid for the original DVD release.
and convenience. So, are we going to have to pay again when TVs go 16HD years in t
True. I'm willing to look at the remastered versions if there's a way to do it (Netflix?), just don't want to have to pay for them, since I have already paid for the original DVD release.
Many movies were shot on film, so there's already higher definition source available, which may or may not need cleaning up. Actually, I have the
Maybe the long term solution is an improvement in upscaling abilities of players? :) Newer algorithms can make things look a bit better, though remastering will always give the best result.
It's possible, if you're not normally one to read fantasy. I had only heard of it, because I had friends at school who read LOTR and The Hobbit.
I watched and recorded the original Star Wars movies on TV all the time as a kid. Good times.
The remastering work was largely outsourced and paid for itself in
disc sales and licensing to Netflix, so it's not like it a major
strain on Viacom/CBS that kept them from working on other stuff.
Good points. Maybe I'll just keep Netflix for any updated versions. :)
generally weren't framed for widescreen. If they added in the extra
part of film to make the image widescreen, many shots would show things such as camera equipment, boom mics, etc., which wouldn't be ideal.
I didn't realize this until several years ago, but I heard there was a Star Wars Christmas Special that aired on TV in the early 80s (1983 or 1984, I think?). I heard the Star Wars Special was pretty bad, and it
I didn't realize this until several years ago, but I heard there was a Star Wars Christmas Special that aired on TV in the early 80s (1983 or
Re: Re: Favorite Movie Genre
By: Vk3jed to Nightfox on Mon Jul 10 2017 06:37 pm
True. I'm willing to look at the remastered versions if there's a way to do it (Netflix?), just don't want to have to pay for them, since I have already paid for the original DVD release.
Both Trek remasters (TOS and TNG) are presently the versions of the show available on Netflix. I think they're also the versions that are being sold for rebroadcast to television stations (at least I know the episodes of TOS on MeTV OTA are the remaster.)
There are infamous stories about the reframing/color corrections/remasters they did of the Buffy The Vampire Slayer series for FX that ends up showing camera equipment and crew (or in one case a character that was supposed to be invisible but was standing just out of frame, and was picked up once they stretched), and a nighttime scene becomes brightly lit as if it's daytime...which is awkward when there's a vampire in it who should have burned up.
Both Trek remasters (TOS and TNG) are presently the versions of the
show available on Netflix. I think they're also the versions that are
being sold for rebroadcast to television stations (at least I know the
episodes of TOS on MeTV OTA are the remaster.)
that's too bad because there's nothing wrong with the old copies.
Necrosis wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Good points. I sometimes think that some of those older styles of
special effects actually add a certain charm or character to the image
of the show or movie that is hard, if not impossible to capture fully today. For example, things like: The original Alien, Star Trek TOS,
Blade Runner, Original Star Wars, etc. They might look a bit out of
place and dated to a younger viewer, but, they have a certain tone that they captured. I always liked that grimy and lived in feeling of the
ships in the original Alien movie which helped inspire the look for the original DooM. -Necrosis
Necrosis wrote to Deepthaw <=-
Heh. I grew up with TNG when it was on tv and watching re-runs of TOS
on our local FOX TV channel with my dad when I was a kid. A co-worker
of mine whom is younger got into Star Trek recently and watched an original copy of TNG. When I first heard about him doing this, I
cringed just thinking about how he must of taken to that first dredded season of TNG. Surprisingly,he ended up liking the series quite a bit!
I agree also. Effects are nice but story is what matters the most.
Necrosis wrote to Nightfox <=-
I know the prequels where made into book form which actually made for a good read. It kinda shows that the story of those movies weren't bad;
it was the execution in their production.
I watched and recorded the original Star Wars movies on TV all the time
as a kid. Good times.
Deepthaw wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Both Trek remasters (TOS and TNG) are presently the versions of the
show available on Netflix. I think they're also the versions that are being sold for rebroadcast to television stations (at least I know the episodes of TOS on MeTV OTA are the remaster.)
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
and convenience. So, are we going to have to pay again when TVs go 16HD years in t
You'd at least have to buy a newer TV, which I think is normal as technology advances.
I know what you mean, and I don't always feel like buying newer
versions of something I already have.. On the other hand, I realize
that work went into making (or trying to make) it better, which is probably worth something.. If it was exactly the same as what I
already have, then I definitely wouldn't buy it. But if I don't
already own a version of it, I'd prefer to buy the best-looking
version.
I'm actually a little surprised how upscaling can make a DVD look
decently good on a higher-resolution TV. I've always heard that you
can't add detail to something that's low-resolution, so I've wondered
how exactly they do the upscaling.
It's possible, if you're not normally one to read fantasy. I had only heard of it, because I had friends at school who read LOTR and The Hobbit.
When I was younger, I had heard of The Hobbit, but I didn't make the connection between The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings until someone told
me they were related. I never read The Hobbit though..
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I like streaming movie services, but sometimes if I really like the movie/show, I still feel like I'd rather have my own copy at home. If
I want to watch something again, I'd rather not stream it multiple
times (important if your ISP has a bandwith cap, but these days I think most don't). Also, streaming services and internet service can
sometimes go down, so they aren't always reliable. But does that
always justify spending the money on a DVD/blu-ray copy? Probably not.
:)
As far as the Star Trek TNG blu-rays, I was somewhat frustrated to find out a little while ago that after I bought the seasons individually as they came out, they made a package with the entire series on blu-ray
that is cheaper than what I spent by buying each season individually..
I could have saved money by just waiting. But I suppose if nobody
bought each season as they were released, then they probably could have figured that nobody was interested and could have stopped working on remastering the further seasons.
weird state. Currently, it's not reading any disc - worked perfectly one night last week, the next, it couldn't read a thing. The DVD recorder is probably also coming towards the end of its service life. Had it for 8 years at least, so an upgrade cycle for some AV hardware is not far off.
regularly viewed stuff. Streaming is a good way to sample other stuff out there, or for those "light" ones like Highway to Hell - about the Canadian road rescue/towing crew.
episodes of TOS on MeTV OTA are the remaster.)
that's too bad because there's nothing wrong with the old copies.
Too bad? Sure there was nothing wrong with them, but do you think the remasters are worse?
I'd think the remasters would be an improvement,
visually. Otherwise, why bother?
Re: Re: Favorite Movie Genre
By: Necrosis to Nightfox on Sun Jul 09 2017 09:09 pm
I watched and recorded the original Star Wars movies on TV all the time a kid. Good times.
I didn't realize this until several years ago, but I heard there was a Star Wars Christmas Special that aired on TV in the early 80s (1983 or 1984, I think?). I heard the Star Wars Special was pretty bad, and it was only aire on TV that one time. And I've heard it hasn't officially been sold on any medium, so there are bootleg copies of it that people sell.
Nightfox
True, we haven't gone 4HD yet, still on 1080p tech here. Haven't seen a
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Sounds similar to my past experience with CD/DVD burners.. When I
first started using CD burners in the late 90s & early 2000s, it seems
the ones I would buy would typically last about a year or two and then
no longer work reliably. I've had my current burner in my PC for about
6 years though and it's still working fine..
Come to think of it, I hadn't thought of checking for a firmware update for my burner. I used to keep up with firmware updates (I like to do
that since they often fix bugs that they catch at the manufacturer),
but I haven't had any problems with mine.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Speaking of streaming, a while ago I decided to set up my own Plex
media server at home, and I ripped a bunch of my movies to it. I also copied my music collection to it. It has been fairly handy to stream stuff to our TVs rather than go get the disc, turn on the blu-ray
player, pull out the disc, and put it in..
My first exposure to TNG was by accident. I was watching TV late one night when it came on. I remember thinking "This looks like Star Trek, but it's different", but quickly got into the show. Not long after, there was a spec on TV about TNG and its place in the Star Trek universe. I was hooked.... AGAIN! :D
My first exposure to TNG was by accident. I was watching TV late one night when it came on. I remember thinking "This looks like Star Trek, but it's different", but quickly got into the show. Not long after, there was a spec on TV about TNG and its place in the Star Trek universe. I was hooked.... AGAIN! :D
Deepthaw wrote to Vk3jed <=-
True, we haven't gone 4HD yet, still on 1080p tech here. Haven't seen a
I got a 4K HDTV a few months ago, and the only 4K content I ended up watching on Netflix was stand-up specials.
On the plus side: Dave Chappelle's still pretty funny.
What I *really* need to do is get a Blu-Ray player and Planet Earth 2.
Necrosis wrote to Vk3jed <=-
It's kinda fun finding things like that by accident. Despite being a 'cable cutter' myself, I do miss that part of conventional TV back in
the day..finding stuff late at night or early in the morning by
complete accident.
You have a 4k TV without a Blu-Ray player?
I got a 4K HDTV a few months ago, and the only 4K content I ended up watching on Netflix was stand-up specials.
Speaking of streaming, a while ago I decided to set up my own Plex
media server at home, and I ripped a bunch of my movies to it. I
also copied my music collection to it. It has been fairly handy to
stream stuff to our TVs rather than go get the disc, turn on the
blu-ray player, pull out the disc, and put it in..
I like the concept, but a couple of things make me think twice:
1. I've had better luck with DVDs than hard disks.
2. Finding a solution that meets both storage (many TB) and power (needs to run off stray electrons) requirements, as well as reliability. :)
You have a 4k TV without a Blu-Ray player?
Yep - Netflix has 4K streaming so that's been good enough. In all honesty, I can barely even tell a difference and the real reason I went for 4K was a) it was only slightly more expensive than 1080p, b) to future proof for when I do get a blu-ray (didn't want to buy already outdated technology
and c) it has excellent input lag (how long it takes to display the video input. this is important for video games.)
Too bad? Sure there was nothing wrong with them, but do you think the
remasters are worse?
I'd think the remasters would be an improvement,
visually. Otherwise, why bother?
because people are stupid. you and i would have to actually see these things to judge if it's truly an improvement.
after doing a search for it to download, this remastering seems to be a fad that has gone on for years. i even see the incredible hulk remastered.
Deepthaw wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Yep - Netflix has 4K streaming so that's been good enough. In all
honesty, I can barely even tell a difference and the real reason I went for 4K was a) it was only slightly more expensive than 1080p, b) to
future proof for when I do get a blu-ray (didn't want to buy already outdated technology and c) it has excellent input lag (how long it
takes to display the video input. this is important for video games.)
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I like the concept, but a couple of things make me think twice:
1. I've had better luck with DVDs than hard disks.
Really? Have you had a lot of hard drives go bad? That has been a
rare occurance for me. I've had one bad hard drive, in my main PC
which I built several years ago, but I got it replaced by the
manufacturer under warranty. I ended up waiting about a year or 2 after
I built the PC before I realized it wouldn't hurt to contact the manufacturer about it - and they still replaced it (with a bigger
drive, even).
2. Finding a solution that meets both storage (many TB) and power (needs to run off stray electrons) requirements, as well as reliability. :)
I figured since I already run a BBS machine 24/7, it wouldn't hurt to
set up a Plex server for home media. My current BBS machine has been fairly reliable for the last 5 and a half years since I built it.
Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
There is 4K content you can stream online. You don't absolutely *need*
a blu-ray player for 4K.
Nightfox wrote to Mro <=-
whether you want to spend the money to replace it with a
high-definition copy. But if you don't own it already, I think it
makes sense to buy the version that looks the best for the TV you have.
What I *really* need to do is get a Blu-Ray player and Planet Earth 2.
An Xbox One is also a Blu-Ray player.
I've decided that when I finally hop on the modern console train again, I'll get a PS4 (I love me some Street Fighter.) Sadly, the PS4 Pro doesn't do UHD Blu-Rays - only the XBox One S. :(
I've decided that when I finally hop on the modern console train again, I'll get a PS4 (I love me some Street Fighter.) Sadly, the PS4 Pro doesn't do UHD Blu-Rays - only the XBox One S. :(
I just jailbroke my old Wii, I've loaded a 4GB SD card with games and it's going to be our cabin console. Wii Sports is still one of my favorite
pre-modded Wiis on ebays for like $40 bucks now so I might just get another one. I love using the Wii for playing Atari emulated games. It really is a useful console. Cool controller options too.
I have an XBox One that I never use, time to start playing with it - it just seems like every time I fire it up I need to wait for a gig update to download.
1. Start it up more often, or:
2. Go into setting, power option and set it up as instant on with automatic downloading selected
Since you have all of the controllers and cables, you might be able to find the bare console at a thrift store - The one on Morrissey and Soquel in SC had one for $5.00.
I have an XBox One that I never use, time to start playing with it - it just seems like every time I fire it up I need to wait for a gig update to download.
1. Start it up more often, or:
2. Go into setting, power option and set it up as instant on with automatic downloading selected, or:
Since you have all of the controllers and cables, you might be able to PF>> find the bare console at a thrift store - The one on Morrissey and
Soquel in SC had one for $5.00.
That Grey Bears? I love that place.
I actually have the PS2 emulator going on my PC. I can just pop in a PS1/2 disc and they boot up automatically.
I remember back around 1999-2000 or so when a company tried to sell a Playstation emulator commercially for Windows PCs. It was called Bleem, and actually improved the game graphics a bit using a PC's graphics card. I heard Sony went after them with a lawsuit though, and Bleem eventually was no longer maintained or sold anymore. I believe Connectix also had a Playstation emulator for PC that Sony took down..
| Sysop: | MCMLXXIX |
|---|---|
| Location: | Prospect, CT |
| Users: | 325 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 150:29:06 |
| Calls: | 507 |
| Messages: | 219700 |