Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 10:57:52 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Robocop (robotic police officer film)

Started by St_Eddie, June 03, 2018, 03:29:52 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Avril Lavigne

Quote from: St_Eddie on June 06, 2018, 08:40:09 AM
More posts like this please, people.  I enjoy reading about how folks became cinephiles.

For the entirety of my childhood, every Saturday night my parents would go out to see bands while my older brother and I stayed the night at my Grandma's house and watched VHS tapes that we rented.  Of course on a Saturday night all the hottest new releases would be already taken, so we'd regularly spend a good half an hour in the video store browsing movies we'd never heard of and picking one based on how cool the cover looked, such as Big Trouble in Little China.

Being a total nerd I also made a list of actors whose movies I enjoyed in the back of my diary and used it as a reference for finding good things to watch.  By the time I was 8 or 9 I'd seen just about every family-friendly '80s movie there was, but had never been allowed to watch anything rated 18.  The closest I got was things like Gremlins, Ghostbusters and The 'Burbs.

Often I'd stare at all the cover art in the horror section, trying to imagine what kind of mindblowingly terrifying & grisly stuff those movies contained, before being called away and renting Spaceballs or The Great Outdoors or Labyrinth for the 5th time.

Then my brother started hanging out with a guy called Steve who regularly showed him tapes of things like Alien, Predator, Silence of the Lambs and Robocop, and I think they started inviting me along to these screenings with the intention of scaring the living daylights out of me for their own amusement.

It was intense stuff at times for sure, but I became an immediate fan of those movies and wanted to see more stuff in that vein.  I even wrote a school report on the Alien series, clumsily trying to explain in the language of a 9 year old how speculative fiction has educational value; my weak justification for just drawing lots of Xenomorphs and writing fanfiction instead of doing real research on a proper subject.  I also got a model Queen Facehugger for my birthday that year, but in the afternoon at my birthday party my friend Claire accidentally snapped its tail off.

Anyway a few years later my Dad bought me a huge box of horror movie related books from an auction, including 'Giger's Alien', the making of Species, the history of Dracula and Frankenstein's Monster in film and most importantly, Michael J. Weldon's Psychotronic Video Guide.  By the time I was 13 and my parents had started to relax on their rules about what I could watch, I was using the Psychotronic Video Guide to figure out which horror movies to buy from HMV with my pocket money every other weekend, building up a pretty huge collection.

My parents didn't like horror at all and by this time my brother was more interested in extreme sports and partying, so I would watch these movies alone in my parents' bedroom with the curtains drawn and feel completely transported & immersed for a couple of hours, even with trash like Friday the 13th Part V.

Then we got the Film4 channel on cable and I started watching more experimental films, decided to study Film / TV & Media at college and now I probably spend more time reading opinions, analyses and behind-the-scenes info on movies than actually watching them, but I really enjoy it.

Blumf

Quote from: Shameless Custard on June 07, 2018, 01:02:37 PM
Gotta say though, I wasn't blown away by the quality of the transfer. Looked a bit grainy. It says it's the remastered version though, so maybe it's just my eyes

I think I must have the same version of BobBobby. It seems to be more than just normal film grain, more like they've added noise to the transfer. Certainly no other film from that era I've seen seems to have such an image issue.


Custard

Ah, glad it's not just my eyes

How straaaaange

St_Eddie

Great post, Avril Lavigne.  Thanks for that.

Quote from: Blumf on June 07, 2018, 02:00:29 PM
I think I must have the same version of BobBobby. It seems to be more than just normal film grain, more like they've added noise to the transfer. Certainly no other film from that era I've seen seems to have such an image issue.

No, I'm pretty sure that level of grain indicates that they did a bang up job on the transfer and didn't resort to using DNR.  It may not be an aesthetic that you personally care for but it's how the movie is supposed to look in high definition.  I've got a few Blu-Rays where this is the case and I'm always relieved to see that they've not fucked up the transfer with DNR (as has previously been mentioned on this thread, The 'Ultimate Hunter' edition of the Predator Blu-Ray is the worst offender for an excessive use of DNR that I've ever seen).

mothman

I was born in another country, where my parents sometimes went to a drive-thru. After I was born, they'd take me along as a small baby, and once parked my dad would sit me upon the steering-wheel, with my legs through the bottom; I'd hold onto the wheel (but still supported), and sit there goggling up at the screen.

Avril Lavigne

Quote from: St_Eddie on June 07, 2018, 10:35:34 PM
The 'Ultimate Hunter' edition of the Predator Blu-Ray is the worst offender for an excessive use of DNR that I've ever seen

Cripes you're not wrong, I just looked it up and it's like they remade Predator with the same technology & software used to make Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within.

bgmnts

Would RoboPlumber work? Or RoboChef?

Blumf

Quote from: St_Eddie on June 07, 2018, 10:35:34 PM
No, I'm pretty sure that level of grain indicates that they did a bang up job on the transfer and didn't resort to using DNR.

Not a single other BR I've seen has grain like that. Not a single film (actual film, in the cinema, not modern digital) I've seen over the years had grain like that.

There's stuff, a lot of 70s and 60s film in particular, that do have a fair amount of grain on them, looks fine. This RC transfer I've got really does look like they added a noise filter on it. Maybe they used really cheap stock for the original film, but I suspect they had a duff copy for the transfer, or otherwise bollocks'd it up in encoding.

Shit Good Nose

Quote from: Blumf on June 07, 2018, 11:56:37 PM
Not a single other BR I've seen has grain like that. Not a single film (actual film, in the cinema, not modern digital) I've seen over the years had grain like that.

There's stuff, a lot of 70s and 60s film in particular, that do have a fair amount of grain on them, looks fine. This RC transfer I've got really does look like they added a noise filter on it. Maybe they used really cheap stock for the original film, but I suspect they had a duff copy for the transfer, or otherwise bollocks'd it up in encoding.

That does sound odd then.  Which version have you got?

I've just compared my Criterion DVD with my remastered director's cut blu ray.  The blu definitely has more grain, but I think it's just where more grain is showing up in the high def image.  I think that the remastered blu is also a 4K scan, which will always pick up more grain as well (compare Criterion's recent Barry Lyndon with any previous DVD and blu), but also show up any foibles in cheaper film stock.  The remastered blu is also a lot more bright and vivid than previous releases I've seen, so that might have something to do with it as well.

St_Eddie

Quote from: Avril Lavigne on June 07, 2018, 11:19:48 PM
Cripes you're not wrong, I just looked it up and it's like they remade Predator with the same technology & software used to make Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within.



Visit the new Schwarzenegger exhibit at Madame Tussauds™ today!

Quote from: Blumf on June 07, 2018, 11:56:37 PM
Not a single other BR I've seen has grain like that. Not a single film (actual film, in the cinema, not modern digital) I've seen over the years had grain like that.

There's stuff, a lot of 70s and 60s film in particular, that do have a fair amount of grain on them, looks fine. This RC transfer I've got really does look like they added a noise filter on it. Maybe they used really cheap stock for the original film, but I suspect they had a duff copy for the transfer, or otherwise bollocks'd it up in encoding.

I think that it's more a case of the vast majority of Blu-Ray releases of older films having excessive DNR applied to them.  It's such a rarity not to have excessive DNR, that when such a release does occur, people notice the heavy grain and think that it's a bad transfer.  Sadly a transfer without excessive DNR is the exception to the rule.  It's a bit like with the old pan & scan VHS releases; most people were ignorant to how a film was supposed to look and as such, they'd complain about there being these "irritating black bars" on a widescreen release.

Blumf

Quote from: Shit Good Nose on June 08, 2018, 12:13:28 AM
That does sound odd then.  Which version have you got?

A bog standard issue BR (not Criterion or anything like that), 2007 vintage.

Possibly this one:
https://bluray.highdefdigest.com/1086/robocop_fox.html

Blumf

Quote from: St_Eddie on June 08, 2018, 12:55:48 AM
QuoteNot a single film (actual film, in the cinema, not modern digital) I've seen over the years had grain like that.

I think that it's more a case of the vast majority of Blu-Ray releases of older films having excessive DNR applied to them.

Err... would you like to try that again?

Don't think they were applying DNR to film stock in the 80s and 90s, what with it not being digital and all, and I don't remember such bad grain then. Nor do I see such bad grain on old film stock being re-shown today.

Sebastian Cobb

My arrow video bluray of videodrome is pretty grainy, I like it like that though.

Shame they dnr'ed a lot of those big budget action films as they were around the time film stock peaked.

St_Eddie

Quote from: Blumf on June 08, 2018, 12:59:42 AM
Err... would you like to try that again?

Don't think they were applying DNR to film stock in the 80s and 90s, what with it not being digital and all, and I don't remember such bad grain then. Nor do I see such bad grain on old film stock being re-shown today.

It's a side effect of transferring movies shot on film stock to a high definition format.  The grain which was always there is heightened as a result.

Blumf

Quote from: St_Eddie on June 08, 2018, 01:08:04 AM
It's a side effect of transferring movies shot on film stock to a high definition format.  The grain which was always there is heightened as a result.

So... the BR version will always be worse without some kind of treatment then? Nah.

You realise that this is much simpler if you assume I have a crappy BR of the film. Instead of twisting yourself into knots trying to explain away why this is somehow a problem with all transfers but magically only affects this one version, you can just conclude that there is a bad transfer of the film out there and other versions are better.


[click to embiggen]
https://blog.sundvold.net/blu-ray-robocop-edition-2014/

Check the sky just above left of the 'R'. That's what I'm talking about, nothing to do with film stock, and everything to do with shoddy encoding, that's my problem. Also, note the actual film grain on the right, not a problem.

I think I need to invest in a newer transfer.

biggytitbo


colacentral

Quote from: Blumf on June 08, 2018, 11:06:55 AM
So... the BR version will always be worse without some kind of treatment then? Nah.

You realise that this is much simpler if you assume I have a crappy BR of the film. Instead of twisting yourself into knots trying to explain away why this is somehow a problem with all transfers but magically only affects this one version, you can just conclude that there is a bad transfer of the film out there and other versions are better.


[click to embiggen]
https://blog.sundvold.net/blu-ray-robocop-edition-2014/

Check the sky just above left of the 'R'. That's what I'm talking about, nothing to do with film stock, and everything to do with shoddy encoding, that's my problem. Also, note the actual film grain on the right, not a problem.

I think I need to invest in a newer transfer.

That's not film grain though, those are pixels. But yeah, the newer Robocop BR is better than the older ones.

I do agree though that a film can have "too much" grain as films can be remastered and cleaned up. Look at the special features on the BR for Jaws where they show the process of actually physically cleaning the film itself. That's different from slapping some DNR on it. Generally though grain = detail.

Sebastian Cobb

I think on a reasonably sized telly, film grain can look a bit too fine and look like noise rather than grain. Noise looks horrid compared to grain.

Projection probably softens things a bit, I'm sure the open shutter nature of tellies (as in the frame is displayed for a full 1/24th of a second rather than flashed as a double-bladed shutter passes by it).

Blumf

Quote from: colacentral on June 08, 2018, 11:53:48 PM
That's not film grain though, those are pixels. But yeah, the newer Robocop BR is better than the older ones.

I think it's a colour issue, a reduced palette or something (can't be arsed to check what the exact encoding is, some YUV thing I suppose). It's bad enough in that still, but when the image is moving you're seeing colours flip between those approximations constantly and the end result is a 'grainy' (not film grain, obviously) image.

I've got a DVD of The Adventures of Baron Munchausen which has a similar issue. Like a badly make GIF.

Sebastian Cobb

Quote from: Osmium on June 04, 2018, 07:24:19 PM
The corporate cunts in RoboCod 2 becoming Nazis is good illustration of its lack of subtlety.


BEHAVE YOURSELVES!

I rewatched this last night. I think it's exactly like Escape from L.A. in that at the time it seemed completely over the top and ridiculous but given the current mad state of affairs seems quite prescient.

Also :s/nuke/oxycontin or xanax/

I never saw the remake, but based on the trailer assumed it was made because people really like That Bit Where Iron Man Lands, so they made an entire film to cash in on that.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

Quote from: St_Eddie on June 05, 2018, 09:16:46 AM
They really don't make 'em like this anymore (because Hollywood no longer has the balls to produce this caliber of mainstream, big-budgeted, R-rated entertainment, with a significant bite, directed by an auteur who's left to his own devices; you need look no further than the remake for proof of this).
What about Logan, Deadpool, John Wick, Fury Road (even though it's not that good - objectively), District 9, or everything by Tarantino? Absurdly violent movies can still get made and still be box office hits. I'm not sure the original Robocop was even a particularly big budget film for the time.

Large Noise

Haven't seen this and would quite like to, but had a look on Amazon and the cunts want £7.99 to buy it (no rental option). Abolish capitalism and let me watch Robocop you cowards.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

That's the price you pay for not watching it sooner.

Blumf

Quote from: Large Noise on July 03, 2018, 02:15:19 PM
Haven't seen this and would quite like to, but had a look on Amazon and the cunts want £7.99 to buy it (no rental option). Abolish capitalism and let me watch Robocop you cowards.

Would you buy it for [...checks ForEx market...] 76 pence?

Sebastian Cobb

Amazon marketplace. £3 for the trilogy on bluray or 45p for the first one.

If you're oddly difficult and refuse to buy physical media then stream and buy options:

https://www.justwatch.com/uk/movie/robocop-1987

St_Eddie

Quote from: Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth on July 03, 2018, 02:09:39 PM
What about Logan, Deadpool, John Wick, Fury Road (even though it's not that good - objectively), District 9, or everything by Tarantino? Absurdly violent movies can still get made and still be box office hits. I'm not sure the original Robocop was even a particularly big budget film for the time.

That's a very valid counter-argument, which exposes my use of hyperbole.  In response, I shall amend my previous statement to "as a generalisation..." and point out that the above examples are more often than not, exceptions to the rule.  Having said that, it would be remiss of me not to mention that, though I may loathe the almost absurd popularity and over-saturation of the superhero genre in today's market, the critical and more importantly, commercial success of Deadpool, did wonderful things for making studios open their eyes to the bankability of big budgeted R rated movies.

Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth

Interesting...

Quote"District 9" director Neill Blomkamp has signed on to direct a new installment of the "RoboCop" series for MGM called "RoboCop Returns," a studio representative told TheWrap.

The project is a long-dormant sequel that had been planned by the original 1987 film's screenwriters Ed Neumeier and Michael Miner, but was cancelled when director Paul Verhoeven declined to direct the project and a WGA strike in 1988 followed. Justin Rhodes, who is also attached to write the upcoming "Terminator" reboot and the DC film "Green Lantern Corps," will rewrite Neumeier and Miner's script, with the two original writers serving as producer and executive producer.

https://www.thewrap.com/neill-blomkamp-direct-robocop-returns-mgm/

Shaky

So if it's a reworking of an original concept for Robocop 2 are we looking at yet another follow-up which ignores the previous sequels? Hard to keep up with this stuff. Wonder if they'll try to squeeze an elderly Peter Weller back into the suit.

mothman

Blomkamp seems to be on course to become the South African Neil Marshall.