So does this mean it will be a very difrent cut of the film as its odd to give a remastered version its own page
you will have to forgive the lack of full stops lack of proper spelling im dyslexic but not stupid
I doubt it'll be a different cut... that would have been announced, I'm sure of it.
shareKind of odd that it has its own page
you will have to forgive the lack of full stops lack of proper spelling im dyslexic but not stupid
yeah, it's strange
shareI can't find it. Is it removed?
This page will make you a smarter member --> http://www.imdb.com/help/boards/markup
If you look on don't cascorelli,s filmography its at the top
you will have to forgive the lack of full stops lack of proper spelling im dyslexic but not stupid
Thanks!
It is interesting that people made a new page.
The same thing happened to Superman II Donner Cut.
This page will make you a smarter member --> http://www.imdb.com/help/boards/markup
Isnt it just an upgrade for video quality anyways? Why give it the remastered title, as most movies receive a bump in quality once they make it to blu ray
shareThere's early reports that Coscarelli is going all Lucas on us. Wire removal, CGI replacement of old effects, the works.
shareWhere did you hear this
you will have to forgive the lack of full stops lack of proper spelling im dyslexic but not stupid
http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2016/08/31/don-coscarelli-talks-phantasm-and-its-latest-4k-restoration
BMD: I’ve seen the movie on just about every format it’s been made available on – 35mm, VHS, DVD, and now this 4K DCP. Watching it jump resolutions between exhibition methods, you can pick out some of the production’s limitations – budgetary and otherwise. Was that something you were worried about when you were re-mastering the film? Or did you use this opportunity to tinker a bit?
DC: Oh, hell yeah. There are the obvious things we were able to improve – we removed every piece of tape and fishing line utilized in the creation of the silver spheres and how we made them fly. I always thought they were very obvious during the 35mm run. Yet on the Standard Def VHS and DVD, you could never see them.
The movie was made in a very guerrilla fashion, so there were flaws I didn’t even catch on the first go ‘round. Take for example the moment where the brothers enter that white room in the mausoleum, and there’s this weird yellow bucket in there. I don’t know where that yellow bucket came from! Everyone who watches this movie is so focused on the plot, story and atmosphere, and I’m sitting here going “what’s that bucket doing there? How did it get in the shot?” It’s torture for me to watch the movie sometimes, but we removed things like that which drove me crazy.
We also improved a few VFX shots that always bothered me, but were also careful not to overdo it. We didn’t want to lose the film’s charm. Also, we didn’t want to remove too much grain, except in the scenes where we were working with damaged negative. It still had to have that analog 35mm flavor. But there was this one visual effect that – at first I didn’t tell anybody, because I wanted to see if anyone would catch it at SXSW – nobody caught. It’s a profile close-up shot of the ball flying down the hallway and we had done it the old fashioned way: put it up against some black velvet to create the shot. But there was no movement in the shot and nothing reflecting off of the ball as it moved. So we tinkered with flaws like that. There’s the old adage that whenever filmmakers watch their own films all they see are the flaws and that’s totally the case with me.
This was the joy and good fortune of having JJ [Abrams] and his team working on the project. He had a top VFX guy named Andrew Kramer whip up a 20-frame shot of a completely synthetic sphere that looks spot on. You can even see the mausoleum flying by in the reflection.
Ah OK cheers
I'm actually OK with some tinkering like wire removal altering stunt doubles heads to match ect what I have a problem with is the George Lucas method were loads of pointless stuff gets added like greedo shooting 1st Darth Vader shouting nooooooo and removing actors in favor of new actors
I really liked blade runner final cut and wire romovals in robot cop hopefully don dosent over do it the interview implys he's kept it minimal
you will have to forgive the lack of full stops lack of proper spelling im dyslexic but not stupid
From what I've heard, most people haven't noticed the changes at all, even the die-hard fans. So at least the changes seem to be subtle.
If you can't defend a movie without bashing another, you will be put on ignore. No exceptions.
I'm watching it now on SyFy. The picture and sound is much clearer, and I believe that in the first scene with the sphere there may be one cut shot that is CGI. But if it is, it's only a quick shot. I rewound my DVR a couple of times and re-watched it, but I couldn't really tell.
Other than that, I believe it is pretty much the same as the original.
Rex
EDIT: I believe the movie you saw on the director's IMDB page is for Phantasm: Ravager. It is the 5th and last movie of the franchise.
When movie hell is full, re-makes shall walk the earth.
[deleted]
what? I have the movie and watched it the other night and didn't catch any of that stuff. guess I'll have to look at it again and pay closer attention.
shareBasically every Phantasm fan I've heard from says the differences are nearly impossible to see without doing a direct comparison.
For example: http://www.caps-a-holic.com/c.php?go=1&a=0&d1=9498&d2=9499&s1=91913&s2=91914&i=10&l=0
If you can't defend a movie without bashing another, you will be put on ignore. No exceptions.