Well, if anything else, this has been an entertaining thread that's lead to anarchic ambiguity. We'll have to see what this mysterious "second announcement" pans out to be. Personally, I (along with droves of other LOTR fans here) hope that a Hobbit movie "with Peter Jackson at the helm" becomes a reality. It stands to reason however that this "second announcement" will be nothing more than a public admission to the spoof. On the other hand, the conspiracist in me thinks this could all have been a publicity stunt of sorts to ascertain public interest.

"What does your heart tell you?"

- Josh

Let me explain. This was not a joke on my part. I read the so called "official" press release on theonering.net and as it turns out that was actually as you have guessed-a hoax. Although that would have been good joke I swear at the time of making this topic I had no idea. On the other hand I am very relieved Anderson is not directing. Like mra said there IS gonna be an announcment today. So maybe Pete might direct after all! We can only hope.

Could the grain issue be a compromise?
Are the bigger grain films faster or allow more saturated colors?

LOL... man, I think I may have to go after a Masters in film studies Eddie. Every time I bring up a question that I can't seem to see the solutions to (concerning film or movies)... your answers seem like they were there all the time, I just couldn't see them. Great analogy with the comic book feel in X2! I never would have thought of that. I completely understand what you were talking about with the "jerky" look in DV concerning slo-mo or fast motion, versus film. I guess I just didn't know that it was DV that was causing that. You have to love the shots that the technology "bullet time" allows though!

Concerning standard DVD's on HDTV... you're probably right, in some cases. But what about the DVD's that look flawless on my screen? I'll have to see what Big Fish looks like, and some of the other new movies releasing to DVD, and report back to you. I've been going through my collection to see if I could come up with some examples (other than X2) for both you and John... I haven't found any yet, but if you check out my library - EXTERNAL LINK - you'll see this could take a while.

Thanks Eddie.

- Josh 8)

Josh,

It's very possible with the "X-Men" movies that someone wanted the film to look like pages from a comic book. With comics, you can see the dots that are used to create colors, and you can also see the bumps of the paper's texture. Therefore, grainier film could've been used to replicate the look and feel of reading a comic book.

The strobing effect of video technology (digital and analog) occurs when you film things in fast or slow motion. When shooting with video, fast or slow motion looks jerky because video is unable to capture smooth motion. The image seems to skip every other frame (i.e. when shooting slo-mo, an object moves in large chunks rather than in small steps). However, when using film, fast and slow motion looks continuous rather than "skippy". Mind you, this is something that occurs during shooting and not when you watch things hitting the pause button every second, but even when you watch step-motion with your DVD player, you can see what I'm discussing.

Eddie

P.S. Well, tube TVs last longer than any other TV types, though different people like the looks of different TVs. I'm sure that if you're seeing "grain" with "X2" on one type of TV, then you're probably going to see it elsewhere (unless your TV is incorrectly calibrated?). Of course, you're watching DVDs with a res of 500 on an HDTV that has a res of 768? You're gonna see "faults" that aren't really faults, lol.

I agree. I had forgotten about when you told me about the differing grains. I haven't heard of the "strobe effect", what's that about? So it sounds like (at the moment) that either way, we just can't win. Either you have the grainy problems when viewed on HDTV's, or you get this "strobe effect". Don't get me wrong about standard film. There are some DVD's out there that look PHENOMINAL on my tv! I love them! It's just those few DVD's out there that because they used a larger grain film initially when filming, or the compression when transferred to DVD was horrible, or what have you that it becomes distracting as you watch, and pulls you out of the story (which would negate the point of watching the movie in the first place).

I know you've said that a lot of times directors will go with larger grain film to get that "gritty" feel to a movie... which I could understand with maybe a Western where you want it to "feel" old. However, in the movies of late (I'll keep using my standard example) such as "X2 X-men United" I feel there's no justification there. It makes me wonder if it was just the bottom line that kept them from useing a finer grain film (if that was the culpret). As I mentioned, it's just very frustrating to be pulled out of a story because something in the film distracts you. Directors seem to keep distractions down to a minimum (unless they're trying to distract you) to keep you in the movie, and keep you focused on their goal. I believe you had made mention also Eddie, that it may have something to do with projection HDTV's? I'm going to have to go to the electronics store, and check out a tube HDTV. They must be head and shoulders above projections.


- Josh :D

Yes, grain is more noticeable in some movies when compared to others, but that has to do with what type of film stock is being used (with some being grainier than others).

Currently, film is better than DV. However, when DV is able to match film's resolution one day, then I agree that DV will come into wide use with film being abandoned. (This is a matter of time and money, not necessarily an issue of whether or not DV will become "better" than film.) However, when the technologies are "comparable", then the difference becomes an issue of taste. I'm sure that DV will one day be able to capture the kind of depth that film does, but DV still has this strobe-light effect that is inherent in video technology (it can not be avoided, even with 24p or VIPER cameras). Also, some of us will always feel nostalgic about grain (even though many of you complain about it, lol).

Eddie,

Don't you mean when he praises "DV is just better"? While I acknowledge (and agree with you) that film is currently "5 times higher" (thus superior) in resolution to DV, I do agree with Jimmy (which I do loosely) on the fact that DV will EVENTUALLY become a better medium and higher in resolution than film. While this may not come about until a few years (or more) after HDDVD is in full swing, I believe it will happen.

BTW Eddie, did we come to the conclusion on the "grainy" discussion that it was a fault of compression? Meaning that in some movie's it's more noticible than in others on DVD?

- Josh 8)

In general, film stock that work better in low light conditions are granier than film used for bright conditions.

I'll have to go back and look at my Tim Burton DVD's to see if that rings true. If anyone's movies are "dark" (both figurative and literal) Tim's are.


- Josh