RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,684
Posts: 5,212,997
Members: 24,206
Currently online: 880
Newest member: Trekker_Tokyo


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science Fiction & Fantasy

Science Fiction & Fantasy Farscape, Babylon 5, Star Wars, Firefly, vampires, genre books and film.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old January 12 2013, 01:44 AM   #61
Trekker4747
Fleet Admiral
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

tighr wrote: View Post
Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote: View Post
My DVD's were scratched. A buddy was nice enough to get me the blu-rays for Christmas!
I bought the DVDs the day they came out.

I bought the Blu-Rays the day they came out.

Bar none, my favorite film trilogy.
Same here. I loved the trailer/teaser for the Back to the Future DVD set. Really gets one pumped for the series!



One thing I've always found interesting about the movie is how it seemed Zemeckis knew to "over-do" the 1980s in the same manner he "over-did" the 1950s. The '50s are shown pretty much in that over idyllic way, much how people claim to remember it (when reality it was likely less Wally and the Beaver and High Schools being out of Grease.) With over-obvious nods to the time in advertisements and set dressings and such. But even the 1980s were a bit "overdone." Showing the aerobics studio, the blight of "Reaganomics" around the town square, Marty's clothing involving a lot of denim and a goose down vest, hell, even with the use of the DeLorean.

It's humorous just how 80s the movie is.
__________________
Just because it's futuristic doesn't mean it's practical.

Last edited by Trekker4747; January 12 2013 at 01:54 AM.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2013, 02:41 AM   #62
Mr. Laser Beam
Fleet Admiral
 
Mr. Laser Beam's Avatar
 
Location: The visitor's bullpen
View Mr. Laser Beam's Twitter Profile
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

2015 was even worse.
__________________
Taysiders in Space. In amungst ye!

"Set phasers tae malky!"
Mr. Laser Beam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2013, 02:50 AM   #63
Trekker4747
Fleet Admiral
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
2015 was even worse.
Well, in Zemeckis' defense he didn't really want to do a movie in the future but his hands were tied based on the joke-ending he made for the original movie (where no sequel was intended otherwise he wouldn't have had Jennifer in the car.) So he went over the top with the future which, obviously, will be nothing like the real 2015 even if we overlook things like portable fusion devices and flying machines.
__________________
Just because it's futuristic doesn't mean it's practical.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2013, 04:28 AM   #64
GalaxyX
Rear Admiral
 
GalaxyX's Avatar
 
Location: Canada
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

Trekker4747 wrote: View Post
Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
2015 was even worse.
Well, in Zemeckis' defense he didn't really want to do a movie in the future but his hands were tied based on the joke-ending he made for the original movie (where no sequel was intended otherwise he wouldn't have had Jennifer in the car.) So he went over the top with the future which, obviously, will be nothing like the real 2015 even if we overlook things like portable fusion devices and flying machines.
The 2015 sequences were my favorite part of all 3 movies. The movie really bogs down with the Alternate 1985 though, and retreads in the 1955 sequences horribly.

As for FX, there are literally like 20 seconds worth of FX I would say need fixing, particularly scenes which are clearly badly done model shots. Practically any CGI would do better today, and would cost them thousands. Pocket change compared to how much they would sell the enhanced Blu-Rays.
__________________
The Grand Nagus sees no difference between business and pleasure......
GalaxyX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2013, 05:08 AM   #65
Trekker4747
Fleet Admiral
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

There are a few poorly done (by today's standards, at least) compositing shots between the models and the live-action shots. There's also some well done shots. But, really, if they fix just one thing I'd like it to be seeing the "real wheels" you can see driving the "hovering" DeLorean in pursuit of Biff's car in 1955.
__________________
Just because it's futuristic doesn't mean it's practical.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2013, 05:23 AM   #66
theenglish
Rear Admiral
 
theenglish's Avatar
 
Location: Suriname
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

Trekker4747 wrote: View Post
One thing I've always found interesting about the movie is how it seemed Zemeckis knew to "over-do" the 1980s in the same manner he "over-did" the 1950s. With over-obvious nods to the time in advertisements and set dressings and such. But even the 1980s were a bit "overdone." Showing the aerobics studio, the blight of "Reaganomics" around the town square, Marty's clothing involving a lot of denim and a goose down vest, hell, even with the use of the DeLorean.

It's humorous just how 80s the movie is.
I don't know about this. I remember watching the movie in the theatre and not even thinking that it was out of place compared to the other teen movies of the time. Really, look at the eighties parts of BTTF and compare them to the Breakfast Club, Pretty in Pink, Sixteen Candles, Once Bitten, Drive My Car or other teen movies from the era. Are they really that different in tone and visuals?
theenglish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2013, 02:19 PM   #67
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

GalaxyX wrote: View Post
tomswift2002 wrote: View Post
Quite frankly, I prefer the non-CGI stuff that's in the movies, since a lot of times the CGI that's in movies tends to look rushed and just doesn't hold up to real models. Real models just tend to add a depth of dimension to the movies that CGI tends to lack.
So fix up the scenes with real models then!

If they want to keep repackaging the same 3 movies over and over again, at the least fix the stuff that was wrong with them.
I buy blu rays for higher definition, and not because they fucked with the originals.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2013, 07:21 PM   #68
Flying Spaghetti Monster
Vice Admiral
 
Flying Spaghetti Monster's Avatar
 
Location: Flying Spaghetti Western
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

I'm sick to hear of CGI used for the sake of it, especially to change mistakes excessively. Movies are relics of the time and place they were made. I give tribute to the idea that they clever with all of the techniques to make the car fly, that it wasn't one single technique, and that makes me almost happy to be able to see the "flaws" mentioned now, some years on. I'm not against a minimal of mistake correcting in films (like digitally removing the pane of glass separating Harrison Ford from deadly snake in Raiders) but I love how films back then required a mixture of techniques instead of the CGI one solution fixes all panacea!
__________________
97X... BAM! THE FUTURE OF ROCK AND ROLL...

Last edited by Flying Spaghetti Monster; January 13 2013 at 01:52 AM.
Flying Spaghetti Monster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2013, 07:31 PM   #69
tighr
Commodore
 
tighr's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

Practical effects are definitely the way to go. Far superior than CGI. Alwyas appreciate when a director goes the extra mile these days and actually films something rather than let a computer do it.
__________________
~Tighr™: Not helping the situation since 1983
tighr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2013, 10:48 PM   #70
Ethros
Vice Admiral
 
Ethros's Avatar
 
Location: 1123 6536 5321
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

Maybe while they're at it they should CGI out Marty's cassette walkman and replace it with an iPhone, because hey that looks a bit dated too
Ethros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 12 2013, 11:17 PM   #71
tighr
Commodore
 
tighr's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

Ethros wrote: View Post
Maybe while they're at it they should CGI out Marty's cassette walkman and replace it with an iPhone, because hey that looks a bit dated too
And in Part III, they can CGI out all the guns and replace them with walkie-talkies.
__________________
~Tighr™: Not helping the situation since 1983
tighr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 13 2013, 04:25 AM   #72
Trekker4747
Fleet Admiral
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

Ethros wrote: View Post
Maybe while they're at it they should CGI out Marty's cassette walkman and replace it with an iPhone, because hey that looks a bit dated too
I know you're joking, but this sort of "advertising" has been suggested and proposed before by companies. Adding in modern day products to reruns of old shows, for example.
__________________
Just because it's futuristic doesn't mean it's practical.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 13 2013, 04:42 AM   #73
Flying Spaghetti Monster
Vice Admiral
 
Flying Spaghetti Monster's Avatar
 
Location: Flying Spaghetti Western
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

Of course they can always say that Doc Brown will eventually go to the future and introduce these devices (like iPhones) into the 80's and the 50's.

Oh wait, in order for that to work, we'd have go with the Bill and Ted theory of time travel where all future interference happens in one single timeline!
__________________
97X... BAM! THE FUTURE OF ROCK AND ROLL...
Flying Spaghetti Monster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old January 13 2013, 12:18 PM   #74
Trekker4747
Fleet Admiral
 
Trekker4747's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote: View Post
Of course they can always say that Doc Brown will eventually go to the future and introduce these devices (like iPhones) into the 80's and the 50's.

Oh wait, in order for that to work, we'd have go with the Bill and Ted theory of time travel where all future interference happens in one single timeline!
Which, really, is how it'd probably "really work" because we ARE in one timeline. Anything that's happened in the past has already happened even if it involved stuff that HASN'T happened yet. Which actually can fuck with the mind when it comes to free-will. Of course this brings into some question about the future's motivations for "saving" Bill and Ted since they'd likely know how time travel works, unless they knew Rufus had to go back to help them to ensure things, but... Bah!

Anyway, the key to how Bill and Ted treated this comes both with the stuff with Ted's father's keys and the stuff at the Circle-K. There's a minor plot thread in the beginning of the movie with Ted's father looking for his keys, we later discovered that Ted stole them by going into the past at some point in the future, stealing them, and hiding them for him and Bill to use to save the historical figures. Then, of course, we see Bill and Ted arrive at the Circle-K and the interaction there before Bill and Ted have left, or even realize what is going on.

It's really a very, very, beautiful use of time-travel.
__________________
Just because it's futuristic doesn't mean it's practical.
Trekker4747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old January 13 2013, 09:04 PM   #75
tighr
Commodore
 
tighr's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: Minor BTTF Part Two question

Trekker4747 wrote: View Post
Which, really, is how it'd probably "really work" because we ARE in one timeline.
I respectfully disagree. What proof do you have that there is and always will be only "one" timeline?
__________________
~Tighr™: Not helping the situation since 1983
tighr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:10 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.