How was the quality of the film stock? Considering they had to restore it from all negatives I was wondering how the film actually looks aesthetically. Does it look good or does it look like a bootleg?
shareSee Guardian review posted, sums up well. Very occasionally noticeable, but we'll worth seeing
shareBut was the VHS quality footage spotty throughout the scenes or were there entire scenes that were bad quality? For example, would the same scene go from good to bad quality randomly or were there just little snippets of bad quality footage sprinkled throughout? For example, the scene where Breckin Meyer and Ryan Phillipe kiss - there is a bootleg version online of that scene and the quality is horrible. Does it look like that in the movie too?
share[deleted]
Yes they did but they couldn't find all of it which is why they used some VHS footage and I was curious how much of it was bad quality.
shareSome shots are bad, some are better.
Saw it in Copenhagen tonight.
--
Peter
I haven't seen the director's cut. But I wonder if some scenes being lower quality are like a highlight saying, "this part was missing up to now." I wouldn't have a problem with that.
What I haven't heard anyone react to is the new voice over. Ryan Phillippe redid the voice over in the last year. That must be an interesting juxpositioning.
It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it.
RIP Roger Ebert
I think it was noticeable that it was the older Phillippe on the voice-over. But it's the voice-over of the character looking back, so it makes sense.
I don't remember the old version well enough to compare.
--
Peter
Yes, another interesting facet.
It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it.
RIP Roger Ebert
Pbn, when you say some shots are bad does that mean that in the middle of a random seen some shots will be good and others will be bad quality? For example the make out scene between Ryan and Brecken. How is the quality on that scene?
shareThe digital tricks today are so significant that much of that could be easily fixed.
--
http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m127/tubesteak69/Divas_Who_Drink-1.jpg
I just saw the DC at the San Francisco International Film Festival. Some, but not all, the reinserted footage was from VHS. A good chunk of it was on film. Of course, the projection was digital and much of the film was very soft and hazy to begin with (as that's considered "The 70s Film Look"). To be fair, if this was all that exists, it's better than nothing. Those parts look like kinescopes of videotaped 1970s sitcoms like All in the Family and Soap.
But the film now has something it never had before: narrative cohesion. Restoring the bisexual love triangle now lends motivation to the characters' actions. It also expands Cameron Mathison and Erika Alexander's roles. As a result, it's a much, much better film. Now I'm starting to think about the trajectory of the actors' careers had Mark Christopher gotten final cut privileges.
When they say a bisexual love triangle what does it mean? I mean other than the kiss between the boys what other things there is in there?
Are the two boys say they love each other or something like that?
3s2m, how was the quality of the Ryan/Breckin makeout scene?
share3s2m, how was the quality of the Ryan/Breckin makeout scene?
[deleted]
I can't believe that people are actually COMPLAINING about the picture quality. Everyone should be GRATEFUL that they finally can see this movie in it's original form. It really astounds me how spoiled and demanding...and WHINY people have become. It's a bit sickening.
#hands up don't loot