Search options (Page 4 of 79)

Seasons 1 - 3 don't look like 16mm film to me.

16mm film has a really distinct look: it's extremely grainy. Extremely grainy looking shows include DAWSON'S CREEK, CHUCK, SCRUBS, VERONICA MARS, YOUNG INDIANA JONES, HIGHLANDER, MY SO-CALLED LIFE and Seasons 1 - 2 of BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER. All were shot on 16mm film.

On these shows, the high grain look, when downscaled to SD, created a sense of texture, detail and made everything look more tactile. However, the 16mm film image, when presented in HD release, can have a high level of graininess that can range from mildly or severely distracting; 16mm film grain in 1080p can look like a layer of static or dirt on the image. At 4K, the grain is even heavier.

16mm grain can also add a certain de-glamorized, down-to-earth feel to a TV show. It can be highly effective for DAWSON'S CREEK, SCRUBS, VERONICA MARS and MY SO CALLED LIFE all being about working and middle class people in urban situations as opposed to a pristine spaceship or a glass and steel law firm.

However, that graininess can seem like an unwanted layer, and a lot of people will use noise reduction filters on their TV to tone it down. In addition, most streaming services will denoise their digital files to reduce file sizes and then add grain back as a filter effect during playback.

16mm graininess would seem very out of place in a show like STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION or ALLY MCBEAL which is about pristine environments (a spaceship, a prestigious law firm).

35mm film, compared to 16mm film, has more sharpness and detail and seems less grainy. This is because as 35mm film is a larger format, the grains are smaller and and finer. 35mm film has a very crisp, clean, crystal clear look with a slight grain texture. The pilot episode and Seasons 2 - 3 look like 35mm to me. Episodes 2 - 9 of Season 1 look like they have the frame rate of film (albeit distorted for 30 fps SD TV and converted back to 24 fps from DVD to modern HDTV), but due to the analog videotape editing format, it may have blurred out the visual markers of 35mm film.

Jerry directed one episode of Season 3 ("Stoker" which looks like 35mm) and four episodes of Season 4. All of Season 4 looks like 16mm to me, so that's likely the film he used for 80 percent of his directing and what he remembers using.

I myself noticed that Seasons 4 - 5 are 16mm because I don't have the high bit rate Universal releases, I have the overcompressed Mill Creek release and the slightly lower resolution for PAL Turbine release, but even in these poor formats, Seasons 4 - 5 look pretty good thanks to the heavy film grain causing the image to better survive the compression.

I'm excited to see the latest season soon!

What kinds of episodes do you see your ideas producing?

Every episode of SLIDERS was shot on film: 35mm in the first three seasons, 16mm in the last two. You can tell from the film grain in most of the episodes that it's film. The pilot was clearly edited on film because of its video quality.

The remaining episodes of Season 1 were edited on analog, low resolution videotape, hence their blurry DVD quality. Seasons 2 - 5 were edited on digital videotape, hence their sharpness.

Every episode of SLIDERS except the the post-pilot Season 1 episodes will upscale well enough via AI or even through simple bicubic scaling because digital videotape retains most of the filmic grain that forms the image.

The Season 1 episodes that were edited on analog videotape do not have the film grain needed to create an effective upscaled image.

I guess a simpler explanation might be that the DISCOVERY version of Section 31 is totally destroyed, except the absence of Section 31 simply causes new clandestine agents to take on black ops work on behalf of the Federation as per Article 31 of the Federation Charter and use the Section 31 name for a new organization that has no official ties to Starfleet and operates independently, becoming the Section 31 we see in DEEP SPACE NINE. Again, if Section 31 ceased to exist, someone else would simply create it.

Media normalization of Trump was one of the biggest issues of 2024. Grizzlor has had his finger to the pulse of lots of things and his predictions have been so right that I have had to cry myself to sleep a few times, but claiming media didn't normalize Trump is not factual.

Fairly or unfairly, Henry Cavill's MAN OF STEEL and BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN were only modestly successful and JUSTICE LEAGUE was a failure. Gunn was brought in to restart the DC Universe, and you don't restart by doing what the last person was doing.

Kurtzman didn't become hands on with DISCOVERY until the middle of Season 2 when Aaron Harberts and Gretchen Berg were fired for allegedly abusive behaviour. Kurtzman oversaw the Klingon makeup going back to something more familiar. And for the most part, my recollection is that Section 31 in DISCOVERY was more Akiva Goldsman than Kurtzman. Goldsman has a tendency of writing generic concepts and applying mythic names to them.

Goldsman wrote a generic spy agency and called it Section 31 to make it seem vital rather than make it a less generic spy agency. Goldsman created a generic lizard monster race for STRANGE NEW WORLDS and called them Gorn to make them seem important rather than make them more distinctive characters.

Goldsman is a decent writer at crafting plots and character arcs, but when it comes to enemies and concepts, Goldsman has a tendency to use an interesting name to liven up an uninteresting idea.

I guess that's what's weird to me. What is the point of doing a SECTION 31 movie if it isn't about the shadowy, espionage-noir intrigue of Section 31? Why do it at all?

And the DISCOVERY team completely mishandled Section 31, writing them as a totally generic spy organization within Starfleet that just happened to be called Section 31. Section 31 as established in DEEP SPACE NINE is an off the books, black-ops division that officially does not exist and is not acknowledged by Starfleet or Federation authorities. They answer to no one and nothing and do all the dirty work that the Federation doesn't admit to and flat out pretends doesn't happen. But DISCOVERY treated Section 31 like the NSA or CIA when Section 31 is more like the KGB but with no official sanction or existence.

Mitt Romney (haha) in his autobiography (of sorts) bemoans how his failed presidential campaign foolishly focused on campaigning to the 'bosses' of America. After losing and after a pleasant lunch with the re-elected Barack Obama, Romney realized that most people in America hate their bosses and he should have campaigned to the people who work for bosses instead as there are a heckuva lot more workers than bosses. "Stupid!" he says of himself.

I'd never support this guy, but I could learn a lot from him.

So, we now know how Dexter is alive and how the ending of NEW BLOOD is undone.

Spoilers: https://www.tvinsider.com/1166482/dexte … n-preview/

I wonder what Slider_Quinn21 makes of this. I have never seen the show, but this whole situation fascinates me.

I see we continue our habit of judging and dismissing a series sight unseen.

Continuing ruminations on why Democrats lost the election in 2024.
https://www.salon.com/2024/12/13/democr … nt-truths/

"The working-class voters Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign needed were not moved by talk of joy. They were too angry about feeling broke."

LOWER DECKS is good. I'm disappointed that it's ending so soon. It looks like the show has hit a point where it's brought in all the new subscribers it can, and they need to shift to a new show to bring in new subscribers.

The original STAR TREK was a very silly show at the start and at the finish, but with some over-serious grimdark misery in the middle. TNG began the trend of TREK becoming Serious Science Fiction, albeit with some straight-laced humour. But it's not until Season 4 of ENTEPRRISE and the 2009 STAR TREK rebootquel that goofy humour came back into the series. DISCOVERY was grimdark too, but LOWER DECKS and STRANGE NEW WORLDS finally brought comedy back into full force.

Here's an interesting thought experiment: what if SUPERMAN AND LOIS had featured Tom Welling and Erica Durance?

SMALLVILLE was about Clark as a teenager to their mid-20s. What if Tom Welling and Erica Durance returned to play Clark and Lois in their mid to late 40s? And of course, the continuity and cast of Seasons 1 - 10 would be retained, so Luthor would be Michael Rosenbaum, Sam Lane would be Michael Ironside, and Clark has already fought Bizarro and Doomsday.

What could have stayed the same and what would have had to change? What would have been the story of Clark from his teenaged years to his 70s?

A rumination on how Democrats have not evolved to face structural changes in states and electorate, which led to defeat in 2024 and will lead to even more if they don't make urgent changes.
https://www.thebulwark.com/p/democratic … nationally

It was really good. Overall, it was a modern SUPERMAN movie in four chapters. Season 4 did a good job of shifting around the budget to maintain the cinematic flair for enough episodes that the smaller budgeted ones worked as a breather.

Ever since the first season, I'd been musing that Clark could do more for the world with a charitable foundation than with supersaves, so I liked seeing that play out in the finale.

Back to the subject at hand:

Joe Biden betrayed his promise. He vowed a separation of private concerns and public good, promising that he would not pardon his son Hunter. He broke his word.

I don't blame him at all. I totally agree with all the moral and ethical criticisms of what he has done. But given the impending Trump presidency, I cannot blame Biden for taking every step possible to protect his family from the Trump-steered Department of Justice and FBI. It's morally and ethically wrong, as laid out in the parameters set by Biden himself -- but it shows how much Biden must fear the Trump presidency and how short on options, hope, and belief in America he is at this point.

Biden has decided that the shattering of his moral principles and his political legacy at this point is happening regardless of what he does or doesn't do, and has elected to save his son. I hope all fathers would do the same for their children, but it shows how truly dark the world has become.

My father once told me, "Son, if you robbed a bank, I wouldn't hire a lawyer for you, but I would visit you in jail." However, I'd like to think that if my dad thought I'd be targeted for more than just the crimes I committed, he'd come to my aid.

At the same time, I have a lot of room for the views of those who point out that Biden has turned his back on his own declared standards of right and wrong and betrayed the public trust with his actions.

This is yet another example of you trying to weasel out of your behaviour: you focus on your most recent harassment and minimize or deny it while avoiding how you have a lengthy history of harassment.

Your history includes accusing someone with doubts about Biden of being a Trump supporter; accusing someone who disliked a speech from a black person of being racist; accusing someone who reported Kamala Harris' 2024 loss of being ignorant for reporting basic facts of public record; accusing anyone who didn't buy into unproven election denialism of being a Trump supporter; accusing someone trying to have a serious discussion about pardon powers of demanding respect for Republicans.

You have also repeatedly posted election misinformation to intimidate anyone with criticisms of Democrat politicians and campaigns. You falsely insist that Democrats won. You do this deliberately to make people uncomfortable criticizing Democratic strategy and hesitant to say that Kamala Harris lost the election; you want them to fear your misinformation and accusations.

You are a serial harasser. Your defense is to claim that whatever harassment you engaged in most recently didn't happen while ignoring the massive track record of harassment behind you. It is perfectly clear at this point that despite multiple warnings, you have no intention of curtailing this behaviour.

This track record of repeated harassment and intimidation both overt and subtle is why you are no longer welcome to post here.

I am raising a serious subject of threat and danger, morality and ethics, and you are making light of it.

You are deliberately mischaracterizing a call for serious discussion as a demand to respect Republicans, and your mischaracterization is obvious and ridiculous.

Your LOLs are completely inappropriate for the subject matter at hand. If you can't discuss serious subjects seriously, go somewhere else.

You are treating this like a joke. You are fixated on mockery and ridicule.

Trump is trying to have deranged loyalists run the Department of Justice and the FBI and they would most certainly pursue Biden's son for revenge. Biden's family and everyone who's ever opposed Trump -- the Clintons, the Bidens, Jack Smith, Gretchen Whitmer -- they're all going to be targets.

Show some respect and take it seriously.

Probably not Allison Mack!

Thank you for sharing these, Grizzlor. Always good to see your neat finds and to see Zicree, especially after Torme's passing.

Here, someone rages about how Democrats fail to offer precarious workers anything.

On a podcast, Mark Guggenheim was asked: why didn't the CRISIS finale episode show the SMALLVILLE universe to confirm that Clark and Lois were still alive and well and not destroyed?

If Democrats can get their act together, resistance is not futile, says this article where Donald Trump's total inability to run government is already showing itself again:
https://www.salon.com/2024/11/22/resist … d-against/

There's nothing fundamentally wrong with the advice, "When they go low, we go high" conceptually, but not every piece of advice applies to every situation at all times. Republicans understand something Democrats don't: politics is not, despite all appearances, playing bridge at the club. It's a knife fight in a sewer.

I'm rewatching Season 9 of SMALLVILLE and "Roulette" is a very interesting and ambitious episode. But there's one moment that really jumps out to me as TV perfection -- at one point, Oliver, in the middle of a downward spiral, is trapped in a police interrogation room, having watched his bank accounts hacked and emptied while the room fills with gas. Oliver pounds on the locked door, screams for helps, falls over -- when suddenly, the wall with the door is ripped backwards. Oliver scrambles to his feet in a panic and someone grabs him by both shoulders, holding him up. It's Clark.

"I could hear you yelling," Clark says, and Tom Welling is an effortlessly reassuring, comforting presence to Oliver's terror and confusion. He's just perfect.

Democrats are on the right side of history. But their strategy is on the losing side of history. Their 2024 loss is a matter of public record. I shouldn't be derided overtly or subtly for stating that Democrats lost in 2024 which is a highly observable and entirely factual observation. Defeat is a part of life.

And when people lose, the healthy and well-adjusted person will assess and review how and why they lost and what they can do to achieve better results as opposed to deriding any news source that dutifully reports that the score was 312-226 and not in our favour.

This is a political thread about current events and Kamala's loss is a factual news story. No one should have to debate whether or not Kamala Harris lost the election. Even Kamala isn't debating it.

Kamala's defeat is stressful enough; to deal with someone scornful towards reporting and discussing how she lost is just ridiculous. This is why election denialism is so toxic whether on the left or the right.

I wouldn't say you shouldn't worry. I'm saying that it will not be as easy and immediate as Trump thinks or hopes it will be, and that Democrats are not defenseless... but they are also not invulnerable.

77 million people voted against Trump. That is cause for hope.
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opi … rcna179969

I think it would have happened eventually. A jealous football player would have leaked a video, an ex-con with an axe to grind would have posted something just to lash out and strike back. Not everyone in Smallville is an angel. Someone was going to film something and post something. All it takes is one person with a grudge and a phone.

In a world of smartphone cameras, YouTube, and Smallville having at least one petty criminal, I do not see how Clark's secret could have stayed secret.

THE X-FILES was a 90s show in a very internet-limited era. SUPERNATURAL started in 2005, and it was an era of talk and text phones and low resolution web video; it was not fit for documentarians or plausible revelations. Also, monsters were not sufficiently mainstream and hadn't made major media appearances. It was only in 2008 that YouTube offered HD video streaming; it was only 2011 that the iPhone could film in 1080p video.

Superman, however, is an in-universe global icon in an era of even $200 smartphones being able to film 4K video and upload them to YouTube, and the SUPERMAN AND LOIS series began in 2021 and high definition web video has been a plot element. I don't think Superman can keep a secret identity in a small town in this era; once the town knew, it was going to leak and the world would know.