| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
Echo_City
Joined: 03 Apr 2011
Posts: 1236
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:08 am
|
 |
|
| Quote: | | Do you never see movies at the theater? |
I do not. I'm a proud part of why Hollywood has been raking in less cash this summer than anticipated.
| Quote: | | ...and fills your field of vision more fully? |
I didn't have the option to see this in US theatres and so when I see it on home video, as I imagine that most US viewers of this did/will, I actually get the opposite experience. I'm still getting less detail than I should as this movie is effectively 1920*540 or so as (not bothering to actually measure) only about half of the screen displays the actual movie. In effect, home viewers get gypped with this scheme.
| Quote: | | at least you've convinced me that people who bitch about letterboxing and not just pillarboxing exist. |
Might wanna recheck your logic there as I'm pretty sure that I haven't done what you say I have.
| Quote: | | Ideally, you'd have the original anamorphic image on a BD and a 21:9 TV to maximize screen real estate for the films that needed it, with no black bars added. |
21:9 would be nice, except that the only resolutions I can find are in the neighborhood of 2560*1080 which is far too low of a resolution to buy into at this time when 4k is on the horizon and 2560*1440 monitors are rather readily available.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Mr Adventure
Joined: 14 Jul 2008
Posts: 1598
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:50 pm
|
|
|
| Echo_City wrote: |
| Quote: | | ...and fills your field of vision more fully? |
I didn't have the option to see this in US theatres and so when I see it on home video, as I imagine that most US viewers of this did/will, I actually get the opposite experience. I'm still getting less detail than I should as this movie is effectively 1920*540 or so as (not bothering to actually measure) only about half of the screen displays the actual movie. In effect, home viewers get gypped with this scheme. |
You sound like one of those dimwits from the 90s that hated on widescreen presentations on square TV screens 'because it doesn't fill the screen'.
The movie is presented as a the director intended, for the format they intended. You get just as much 'detail' as you would any other movie in that aspect ratio.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
walw6pK4Alo
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 9322
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 3:02 pm
|
|
|
| Echo_City wrote: | I didn't have the option to see this in US theatres and so when I see it on home video, as I imagine that most US viewers of this did/will, I actually get the opposite experience. I'm still getting less detail than I should as this movie is effectively 1920*540 or so as (not bothering to actually measure) only about half of the screen displays the actual movie. In effect, home viewers get gypped with this scheme.
| Quote: | | at least you've convinced me that people who bitch about letterboxing and not just pillarboxing exist. |
Might wanna recheck your logic there as I'm pretty sure that I haven't done what you say I have. |
But...you're whining about letterboxing on your television, right now. "I am upset because this film doesn't fill my TV's screen" is your argument. And you don't seem to understand that the aspect ratio is chosen for the theatrical run, not your TV. And films have been in these wide aspects since the mid 50s. If you don't go to the cinema, that's your personal problem. Why not just crop off the sides and watch it that way? Or maybe just distort it vertically. Hell, I bet you preferred pan and scan over the original presentation back in the day.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Kakugo
Joined: 29 Nov 2007
Posts: 163
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 3:51 pm
|
|
|
| doubleO7 wrote: | | On another note, and slightly off-topic, but I just recently started reading the manga but found that all but a small handful of the first 20 or so volumes are sold out pretty much everywhere. Have the older volumes gone out of print? |
Basically, yes. DMP likely still has the rights, but hasn't seen enough of a demand to reprint these volumes, making them effectively unavailable. I discovered this a few months ago when the films got my interest up, and got just a little bit ticked when I saw that the first Viz BD has an insert urging me to go read the Golden Age manga. 
My kingdom for some Golden Age Omnibus printings...
| Echo_City wrote: | | I didn't have the option to see this in US theatres and so when I see it on home video, as I imagine that most US viewers of this did/will, I actually get the opposite experience. I'm still getting less detail than I should as this movie is effectively 1920*540 or so as (not bothering to actually measure) only about half of the screen displays the actual movie. In effect, home viewers get gypped with this scheme. |
If I'm not mistaken a 2.35 transfer uses 818 of the 1080 available lines - or, roughly 25% is taken up by matte bars. This is actually how the Star Wars prequels were shot - on a 1920x1080p HD camera with the top and bottom of the frame matted out, not unlike the way hard-matted Super35 or two-perf formats like Techniscope are used when shooting using non-anamorphic film.
The "reason" they chose to shoot the film this way was to give it a more expansive, epic scale in Japanese theaters, which are both the original and target demographic for these movies. There's no way in hell these were rendered any higher than 720p anyway, so how much "detail" there was ever going to be is something of a moot point for most digital animation (Ghibli and Disney excluded).
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
theoriginalbilis
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 10:56 pm
|
|
|
|
I personally thought each movie got successionally better. I enjoyed them overall, especially since i haven't revisited the world of Berserk in years.
However, I can totally understand why many dislike/hate these movies. They do cut way too much out. Especially much of the character-building/world-building scenes. And the CG is pretty lackluster until the 2nd/3rd movies when they seem to figure it out better. I like the idea of 2D faces animated on top of 3D models, but it looked way too stiff until the third movie.
The new movies have persuaded me to re-read the manga, especially the stuff that happens after the Eclipse, so it was a success to me at least.
Here's hoping two things will come of this:
1) We'll see more animated Berserk in the near future (post-Golden Age material.)
2) Dark Horse will restock/reprint those many volumes in the middle that are OOP and go for ridiculous scalper prices... I'd love to go buy Vols. 28-32, but those are frustratingly hard to find.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
SwerveCity
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:43 pm
|
|
|
|
The good thing is after the third movie, there is gonna be a lot less armies going at it, hopefully that'll mean less CG. And they seemed to use less CG per movie anyway, so that's a good sign.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
hojo 360
Joined: 14 Aug 2012
Posts: 429
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 5:15 am
|
|
|
Iv loved the films saw them way back on Neon  i feel the Overall (dub) : C+ was a fail in this Review id at least say B  but people who go by Review's alone are missing out. I love the tv show but the films took things up with the blood and nudity i felt like the films were more like the hellsing ultimate ovs then full on films but call them what you will still nice to see Berserk with new animation
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Lady Multi
Joined: 11 Dec 2004
Posts: 675
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 3:42 pm
|
|
|
| SwerveCity wrote: | | The good thing is after the third movie, there is gonna be a lot less armies going at it, hopefully that'll mean less CG. And they seemed to use less CG per movie anyway, so that's a good sign. |
Of what I've seen of the 3rd movie it still has a good bit of CG; not gonna put me off of buying it, but still it's weird cg.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Sven Viking
Joined: 09 May 2005
Posts: 1039
|
|
Posted: Fri Aug 23, 2013 5:53 pm
|
|
|
|
I unfortunately agree with the review. Berserk is fairly focused on raw emotion, and both the scene choice and the art style of the films detracts from that. Heavy CG could work for something like Ghost in the Shell but, if anything, Berserk would probably benefit from a bit of 4°C's messy, Cat Soup-style animation. The removal of character-building scenes is even more damaging.
Some brilliant work went into the films, and at times I can feel some of the same visceral excitement and horror of the original. At others, though, I get a feeling in the back of my head that it was pointless to produce something ultimately inferior to low-budget 90s series.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Echo_City
Joined: 03 Apr 2011
Posts: 1236
|
|
Posted: Sat Aug 24, 2013 3:04 am
|
|
|
| walw6pK4Alo wrote: |
| Echo_City wrote: | I didn't have the option to see this in US theatres and so when I see it on home video, as I imagine that most US viewers of this did/will, I actually get the opposite experience. I'm still getting less detail than I should as this movie is effectively 1920*540 or so as (not bothering to actually measure) only about half of the screen displays the actual movie. In effect, home viewers get gypped with this scheme.
| Quote: | | at least you've convinced me that people who bitch about letterboxing and not just pillarboxing exist. |
Might wanna recheck your logic there as I'm pretty sure that I haven't done what you say I have. |
But...you're whining about letterboxing on your television, right now. "I am upset because this film doesn't fill my TV's screen" is your argument. And you don't seem to understand that the aspect ratio is chosen for the theatrical run, not your TV. And films have been in these wide aspects since the mid 50s. If you don't go to the cinema, that's your personal problem. Why not just crop off the sides and watch it that way? Or maybe just distort it vertically. Hell, I bet you preferred pan and scan over the original presentation back in the day. |
You originally argued that I have, by my original post, convinced you that there exist people who complain about both letterboxing and pillarboxing. To do this it would have been necessary for me to have complained about both letterboxing and pillarboxing in that post. I did not complain about pillarboxing in that post.
So, as I previous posted, you might want to recheck your logic on this.
| Quote: | | This is actually how the Star Wars prequels were shot... |
I wish that the Star Wars prequels had been shot 
| Quote: | | The "reason" they chose to shoot the film this way was to give it a more expansive, epic scale in Japanese theaters, which are both the original and target demographic for these movies. |
I don't contest that; it is obvious.
| Quote: | | There's no way in hell these were rendered any higher than 720p anyway |
This is saddening. Japan has truly lost its reputation as being the nation "on the bleeding edge" of technology in my eyes.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Chrno2
Joined: 28 May 2004
Posts: 6171
Location: USA
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 7:03 am
|
|
|
|
So the new movie doesn't really bring anything new to the table other than more eye candy and less character development. To be honest considering what was given in the OP I'm surprised that they didn't go farther. Talk about misleading or that it was never intended and one shouldn't have gotten their hopes up. Reminds me of that issue of Marvel's Demon, the cover was awesome then you get inside and you're like, "Huh, Where's the giant demon they promised?" It seems the only good these movies are for are those that probably didn't get access to the TV series. I've only seen the 1st movie and plan to see the rest eventually, but I'll probably wait until they are put in a collection. This is barely a retelling, aside from the fact that they could do more garbage.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Mr Adventure
Joined: 14 Jul 2008
Posts: 1598
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:59 am
|
|
|
|
Just got done watching the movie for the first time. A couple things, I didn't feel like I missed out on any emotional impact of any of the major scenes. I thought all the major characters were all pretty clearly defined, and their actions natural extensions of that. I had no problem getting inside Guts, Griffith, and Casca's heads. It was pretty clear that the other Hawk members were more fleshed out in the comic, but they're such staple cliches its not hard to understand their purpose and roles. And they had a bit more to do this time too, though it was distracting how they manage to survive every dangerous situation.
Keep in mind, this is all coming from someone who read the first volume of the manga 10 years ago, didn't are for it, and never followed up. So I have no way to fill in any supposed gaps the movie might have glossed over. I felt that overall it did a solid job at telling its story and building its character arcs.
I will say the CGI character models were a lot more distracting this installment. Kind of an uncanny valley thing going on with their movements. But I did like how they were really trying to make them appear 2D. And, to be fair, when the models aren't moving they look pretty good.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
phifedawg
Joined: 24 Jun 2013
Posts: 40
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 04, 2013 2:49 am
|
|
|
| Echo_City wrote: | | I didn't see much of the 90s anime (cheap animation, low-detail art & unavailability played into this) |
Seriously? I watched it pretty recently and the artwork really holds up. The backgrounds are amazing.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
