Why is Cameron doing this to his movies? (hexbear.net)

submitted 9 months ago by Walk_On@hexbear.net to c/the_dunk_tank@hexbear.net

60 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml 39 points 9 months ago

They're not tech people, they're theater people. And they're easily wowed by the big new fancy-smancy tech that is "cutting edge"

We've seen this before, with George Lucas' special edition Star Wars and the prequels being full of the finest CGI 1999 could offer. It'll probably be a decade or two before this stuff is anywhere close to looking decent.

[-] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 8 points 9 months ago

Neither James Camwron or George Lucas are theater people in the slightest. They're film people and both did works that were incredible technical achievements. Both of these guys are camera and lense and lighting and editing system nerds first and do the theater stuff so they can get a budget to do the technical stuff.

[-] DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 9 months ago

Sorry, I'm adopting a "once a theater kid, always a theater kid" approach.

[-] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 4 points 9 months ago

Neither ever did anything involving theater.

[-] Poison_Ivy@hexbear.net 7 points 9 months ago

You probably stood in the general direction of a theater once.

Checkmate theater children!

[-] Aria@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 9 months ago

I mean they have eyes. They look at the results and decide they like it. Looking at this, I think it looks worse, but it's not hugely different and I can easily believe it looking better in motion. (The picture in the body. The post-picture looks better in the version that has multiple colours, can't tell if that's new or old, but I doubt the technology chose to make it all blue on its own).

[-] DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 9 months ago

I don't think the people at the top actually sit down and watch the entire process. They are just told it will make the picture "clearer" or "sharper" or "more up to date" or something, they're wined and dined and constantly told how "advanced" this stuff is. If they've put a lot of money into "updating" something they've done, they probably don't want to admit to themselves that they just wasted millions, they'll focus on the positives of it, rather than the negatives.

[-] emizeko@hexbear.net 20 points 9 months ago

I can't even tell which side is before and which side is after

[-] Walk_On@hexbear.net 23 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

In both pictures, the left is before and the right is after.

[-] SuperZutsuki@hexbear.net 9 points 9 months ago

Weird how it desaturates in the first one but adds saturation in the second one

[-] flan@hexbear.net 4 points 9 months ago

i have a feeling one of the pictures has it reversed but we can't tell because we're looking at screenshots of screenshots

[-] davel@hexbear.net 15 points 9 months ago

I, too, am a philistine who finds these changes to be, if not imperceptible then inconsequential.

[-] JakenVeina@lemm.ee 7 points 9 months ago

It might be much more noticable as an actual video, or at the full 4K resolution, but posting these low-resolution still side-by-sides just makes the OP look like a snob.

[-] Walk_On@hexbear.net 5 points 9 months ago

but posting these low-resolution still side-by-sides just makes the OP look like a snob.

Wait, what? lol

I don’t think you know what the word ‘snob’ means.

[-] JakenVeina@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago

a person who believes that their tastes in a particular area are superior to those of other people.

I.E. someone who rants about one thing being significantly worse than another, but provides examples of the two things that are basically indistinguishable from one another.

Like I said, maybe the actual video supports the point, these shrunken still screenshots do not.

[-] Walk_On@hexbear.net 9 points 9 months ago

lol logout

someone who rants about one thing being significantly worse than another, but provides examples of the two things that are basically indistinguishable from one another.

That’s not what a snob is. I just posted links to the pictures so you can see for yourself. It definitely isn’t indistinguishable, especially if you look at Tom Arnold’s face. It’s quite the opposite actually and if calling out weird AI smoothing is being a snob than it seems a large portion of people are.

[-] emizeko@hexbear.net 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I just thought the second one looked better on the right and the first one looked better on the left

[-] davel@hexbear.net 6 points 9 months ago

FWIW I was being sincere, about myself anyway; I can’t speak for you.

[-] FlakesBongler@hexbear.net 17 points 9 months ago

Short answer brrrrrrrrrrrr

[-] ashinadash@hexbear.net 16 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

People act like True Lies is a good movie when it's insufferable. The Terminator is the only good film Cameron ever made. Maybe Aliens on a good day.

[-] Yeat@hexbear.net 4 points 9 months ago

excuse me way of water exists

[-] Yeat@hexbear.net 3 points 9 months ago

and the abyss

[-] utopologist@hexbear.net 3 points 9 months ago

The Abyss fucking sucks, in my personal opinion

load more comments (4 replies)

[-] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 15 points 9 months ago

It's just a movie, not a full TV series or whatever. In absolutely certain the original reels or negatives exist to do a real upscale. For most things I'd rather just keep the original home release quality and leaven it as is, or at least DVD quality for most I should say. Horror movies should be vhs quality as well as certain comedies etc. But if you're gonna do it, don't half ass the process. A lot of people worked really fucking hard to make it look how it does and having an AI paint all over it and call it better is crap.

[-] Thordros@hexbear.net 14 points 9 months ago

oh no the movie that literally inspired the "dirka dirka mohammed jihad" "gag" isn't preserved perfectly noooooooooooo retvrn pls

[-] Walk_On@hexbear.net 12 points 9 months ago

Yeah, I’m not really a huge fan of this movie, it’s just the two examples that have gotten the most discussion. Cameron has applied this to several of his other films that have been re-released in 4k and it serves as a bad precedent towards how much filmmakers choose to manipulate and change their past works like Lucas did.

[-] flan@hexbear.net 13 points 9 months ago

which one's which?

[-] Frogmanfromlake@hexbear.net 13 points 9 months ago

Oh, God. Cameron is going down the George Lucas route. Hearing Darth Vader scream, "Nooooo!" as he carried Palpatine and seeing people cry to that killed a part of me.

[-] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 9 months ago

DO NOT WANT!!!!!

[-] SuperZutsuki@hexbear.net 11 points 9 months ago

The AI one looks so desaturated it looks like a Bourne movie

[-] TankieTanuki@hexbear.net 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

[-] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 6 points 9 months ago

To be honest, the second picture dosen't look bad. It had a more modern photography that can hurt the sensibilities of people who remember it with a more hot color temperature, but it also dosen't looks like a TV movie now.

[-] Walk_On@hexbear.net 5 points 9 months ago

Link to the first picture: https://nitter.net/metaplexmovies/status/1735735555181223980#m

Link to the second picture: https://nitter.net/RazorwireRyan/status/1735752770295128195#m

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2023

55 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15896 readers

301 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

KiaKaha@hexbear.net

wantonviolins@hexbear.net

itsPina@hexbear.net

MiraculousMM@hexbear.net

corgiwithalaptop@hexbear.net

VILenin@hexbear.net

blashork@hexbear.net

replaceable@hexbear.net

EmmaGoldman@hexbear.net

InsidiousTrackers@hexbear.net