Colonial Fleets

Colonial Fleets (http://www.colonialfleets.com/forums/index.php)
-   New Twists On Old Episodes (http://www.colonialfleets.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=76)
-   -   Remastered BattleStar Galatica? (http://www.colonialfleets.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17221)

Matador May 6th, 2010 10:31 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Hello,

Thought I would post some of my CG work. It's basic because I've been doing this on the side of my regular job... But I hope you like it.

Thruster light test.
http://www.youtube.com/danakinobi#p/a/u/1/cThC2FQh8SI

Teaser
http://www.youtube.com/danakinobi#p/a/u/0/VjeqqRel_hI

:yikes:

KJ May 7th, 2010 09:54 AM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
With all due respect Eric, thats just probably YOU feeling so! And not the major majority feeling of everybody else who's an original series Galactica fan.

Special editions far as 'artistic integrity' go, and be 'bent' if such liberties are taken to either update and improve upon the original if touchups were made to them etc. If it were a matter of "general principle" as you say, then how do imagine Star Wars and Star Trek have survived and maintained their appeal for so long? Without their special editions/remastered cuts, they'd look pretty dated and out of touch much as folks try to deny it, they've reinvented themselves in various way from SE and remastered editions to spin offs, video games, merchandising etc to sustain their interests.

Battlestar Galactica as another popular/classic science fiction franchise and cult hit, doesn't have that luxury. and needs to regain its momentum by reinventing itself in this manner. Also by remastering its picture quality to HD and fixing the rough editing errors and haphazzard-ness of the editing styles of years gone by, it'll receive the necessary upgrades and keep its status within pop culture if he got these improvements. And its storylines if anything would be greatly imagined better yet by such a overhaul process or merely touching up the 'painting', metaphorically speaking!

DVD's 720p resolution compared to HD's 1080p is making even regular DVD picture quality look outdated almost. If any show is to survive, you should be for seeing that it'll survive to other forms of digital entertainment in the near future and not worry about whether or not a SE or remastering will ruin the series overall. It won't, long as the remastering process is handled by Larson and co or those that deeply care about the original series and its done properly with the right amount of due diligence put forth to it.

I love the original show, but even older shows have many inconsistencies that could be fixed with a SE or remastered effort. And Galactica has the advantage of being in a genre where that can easily happen if the support was there for it and it overall emphasized the importance of such a thing being a necessary step in keeping the old show viable as a cult classic and sustaining its interest for future generations. and making sure that HD upgrades keep the original untouched version intact as well along side remastered cuts of the episodes for the 21st century.

Lets not forget that on Blu-Ray the original Star Trek episodes are there intact, and you can flip between them using a DVD remote. Star Wars OT is on the 2007 limited edition DVD's although not remastered and without a 5.1 track (in 2.0 only?) nevertheless are present. Much as i'm for keeping the originals next to any SE, in time even the originals look dated and colourless and pale and you wonder, if it hasn't been for the SE, where exactly would the interest be in looking at the series/movie now? I remember reading in 1997 when the SW Special Editions were out, that John Dykstra wasn't in favor of Lucas' SE of Star Wars either? Don't think he's changed his opinion on that fact neither, BUT. Dykstra talented artist and special effects supervisor that he is, is but "one" voice in that opinion though. And coming from a man who bounced around from various productions back in the day, he might come across as somebody who didn't get along because of his opinions. Didn't he fall out with both Lucas at ILM and then later Larson at Apogee and leave both Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica for whatever personal reasons.

To each his own, and somebody's always going to have an opinion on something like this. But to me, if picture quality being improved upon and digital technology's ever growing etc and Battlestar Galactica and shows/movies like it are in that Sci-Fi/Fantasy genre, shouldn't it be kinda prudent for them to take advantage of the technology and be "enhanced" by it, so we can still enjoy it many decades from now?! Showing such lastability is a fantastic concept nobody could've seen and envisioned when these shows and films were done 30 plus years ago.

I centainly think BG needs to go the HD/remastered route in order to survive and be quite viewable for many more years beyond the VHS/film quality it was first shot on!

KJ

P.S. Don't know about you, but i love my 5.1 Surround Sound, 2.0 pales in comparison these days and now we even have 7.1 on PC's and some advanced 'Home Cinema' systems. Yeah let the neighbours complain lol, BG would benefit greatly from this improvement in the sound department "major league" style. And wrap us up truly in the excitement of the episodes playing in such a fashion now!

KJ May 7th, 2010 10:18 AM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Nice vids there Matador. :cool: :thumbsup:

Think its neat you've gone for that Airforce fighter plane "sound" echoing through the landing bay. And Battlestar landing bays with opening metallic hatches on your other vids, hmmmm?

Interesting! :smart:

I gotta do something creative myself this year, but i'll probably go the editing route instead with Adobe After Effects or Adobe Premiere Pro programmes etc. Remember to layer your CGI meshes with a photorealistic skin afterwards.

Then again what programmes are you using.

Here hope this link helps you out some.

http://videocopilot.net/tutorials/

Andrew Kramer's tutorials over there are great to listen to and learn from and he does so much with one segment of a CGI program its incredible. Like i said hope it helps. Please ask DK and Titon for others links to CGI stuff i've put up on here. Heck, i need to ask titon about that magazine one i put up ages ago, been looking for a CGI/artist book that has guides and creatively produced pictures, it too might be helpful to you.

KJ

P.S. Try this one as well at ImagineFX

http://www.imaginefx.com/

Laters! :salute:

gmd3d May 7th, 2010 10:33 AM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by KJ (Post 300315)
With all due respect Eric, thats just probably YOU feeling so! And not the major majority feeling of everybody else who's an original series Galactica fan.

Special editions far as 'artistic integrity' go, and be 'bent' if such liberties are taken to either update and improve upon the original if touchups were made to them etc. If it were a matter of "general principle" as you say, then how do imagine Star Wars and Star Trek have survived and maintained their appeal for so long? Without their special editions/remastered cuts, they'd look pretty dated and out of touch much as folks try to deny it, they've reinvented themselves in various way from SE and remastered editions to spin offs, video games, merchandising etc to sustain their interests.

Battlestar Galactica as another popular/classic science fiction franchise and cult hit, doesn't have that luxury. and needs to regain its momentum by reinventing itself in this manner. Also by remastering its picture quality to HD and fixing the rough editing errors and haphazzard-ness of the editing styles of years gone by, it'll receive the necessary upgrades and keep its status within pop culture if he got these improvements. And its storylines if anything would be greatly imagined better yet by such a overhaul process or merely touching up the 'painting', metaphorically speaking!

DVD's 720p resolution compared to HD's 1080p is making even regular DVD picture quality look outdated almost. If any show is to survive, you should be for seeing that it'll survive to other forms of digital entertainment in the near future and not worry about whether or not a SE or remastering will ruin the series overall. It won't, long as the remastering process is handled by Larson and co or those that deeply care about the original series and its done properly with the right amount of due diligence put forth to it.

I love the original show, but even older shows have many inconsistencies that could be fixed with a SE or remastered effort. And Galactica has the advantage of being in a genre where that can easily happen if the support was there for it and it overall emphasized the importance of such a thing being a necessary step in keeping the old show viable as a cult classic and sustaining its interest for future generations. and making sure that HD upgrades keep the original untouched version intact as well along side remastered cuts of the episodes for the 21st century.

Lets not forget that on Blu-Ray the original Star Trek episodes are there intact, and you can flip between them using a DVD remote. Star Wars OT is on the 2007 limited edition DVD's although not remastered and without a 5.1 track (in 2.0 only?) nevertheless are present. Much as i'm for keeping the originals next to any SE, in time even the originals look dated and colourless and pale and you wonder, if it hasn't been for the SE, where exactly would the interest be in looking at the series/movie now? I remember reading in 1997 when the SW Special Editions were out, that John Dykstra wasn't in favor of Lucas' SE of Star Wars either? Don't think he's changed his opinion on that fact neither, BUT. Dykstra talented artist and special effects supervisor that he is, is but "one" voice in that opinion though. And coming from a man who bounced around from various productions back in the day, he might come across as somebody who didn't get along because of his opinions. Didn't he fall out with both Lucas at ILM and then later Larson at Apogee and leave both Star Wars and Battlestar Galactica for whatever personal reasons.

To each his own, and somebody's always going to have an opinion on something like this. But to me, if picture quality being improved upon and digital technology's ever growing etc and Battlestar Galactica and shows/movies like it are in that Sci-Fi/Fantasy genre, shouldn't it be kinda prudent for them to take advantage of the technology and be "enhanced" by it, so we can still enjoy it many decades from now?! Showing such lastability is a fantastic concept nobody could've seen and envisioned when these shows and films were done 30 plus years ago.

I centainly think BG needs to go the HD/remastered route in order to survive and be quite viewable for many more years beyond the VHS/film quality it was first shot on!

KJ

I would agree with you on this ,, I would go to cgi for it .. there is a lot of talent here for that . its easier to do for a start. all you need is a PC. some decent RAM and Memory.. the Galactica model in cgi . there are a few .. most have been posted here at some stage in WIP form and some are completed ..

to use a real model your going to have to start spending money. even cheaply its still going to cost some cash and thatīs not going to be ponied
up at this present time by any company or even fans based donations for it would be very tough.

I have see efforts over the last year alone.

Fan based effort is possibly the only way and it will have to be CGI ..

and when you come to that why redo all the effects to look exactly the same when most where reuses of the same stock. while I enjoy the show alot the reused effects are tiresome and near boring.

anyway the meat of the show is the character . like original Star Trek and Star Wars they are strong and hold up well.

so adding new effects would be an added benefit.

I liked new effect in star wars and Trek. (except Solo shooting second)

BSG Classic is in need of new effect.

yes they hold up well but still need a reworking

KJ May 7th, 2010 12:01 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Taranis
I would agree with you on this ,, I would go to cgi for it .. there is a lot of talent here for that . its easier to do for a start. all you need is a PC. some decent RAM and Memory.. the Galactica model in cgi . there are a few .. most have been posted here at some stage in WIP form and some are completed ..

to use a real model your going to have to start spending money. even cheaply its still going to cost some cash and thatīs not going to be ponied
up at this present time by any company or even fans based donations for it would be very tough.

I have see efforts over the last year alone.

Fan based effort is possibly the only way and it will have to be CGI ..

and when you come to that why redo all the effects to look exactly the same when most where reuses of the same stock. while I enjoy the show alot the reused effects are tiresome and near boring.


Thank you so much Taranis for you vouch of support in this debate! :thumbsup: :salute:

Unlike Star Trek remastered, if fans could get organised to do this big time. i seriously hope those fans with replica BG models could lend their scale models for the remastered BG (fan produced) version shoot! CGI great, but even with the most up to date photorealistic meshes/skins on ships and whatnot models are still great for that touch of class and nostalgia as Eric's pointing out for us.

He's got a different opinion from many on this, but he cares enough to keep BG classic and untouched somewhat. Reckon that would happen with the original episodes held on Blu-Ray discs next to a brand new remastered version of the Galactica episodes. Seeing as Blu-Ray holds alot of data encoded on them, both original and remastered episodes could easily be held on Blu-Ray discs with sharp HD picture quality for both. The original can even be colour-timed so it holds up much longer.

And if the remastered episodes would restore deleted footage back into their original context within their individual episodes, they'd benefit from a remastered and re-rendered HD process surely.

But yeah Taranis as discussed earlier on this thread, CGI along with possibly some model shots though. Surely many professionally fan replicas are studio perfect in details that they'd be shot more-or-less the same as the original Galactica was by Apogee. Only you could imploy vast 'camera pans' what they didn't use in the '78 series and use wider camera shots of "beauty passes" and yawn and pitches of the camera on a mounted frame and get more epic vistas shots of ships etc (*). CGI ones can be added in post-production and whatnot!

If i remember correctly even Richard Hatch even thought of re-doing TOS effects of Battlestar as a Star Wars inspired SE when he was pitching BG:The Second Coming to Universal when classic Battlestar Galactica wasn't on DVD yet. Well, at first universal did put a BG DVD, but it was barebones? Then we heard news of the Australian region 4 version being used as a template for a remastered DVD (720p resolution) release back in 2000/02 before news of the BG 2003 came about?

Yeah we've been down this road several times, but if it leads to us doing it ourselves i'd be for it.

Hard work ahead and alot of discussions way before then i reckon. If we had Universal's supporting us and we had their/Larson's permission and they backed us with studio help, we'd have the perfect eam right here i think to do BG remastered justice! We could also avoid all the pitfalls Star Trek remastered and The Star Wars special Editions had!

Here's a little inspiration for what we (fan edit) or an official release would have to go through (wanted to use this as a clip in my *list* originally?).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fso13UR_jig

1:14 Relates to my camera angles arguement perfectly*

Think that guys comments about the original series storylines remaining the same reflects my opinions too Eric!

KJ

Matador May 7th, 2010 12:30 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by KJ (Post 300316)
Nice vids there Matador. :cool: :thumbsup:

Think its neat you've gone for that Airforce fighter plane "sound" echoing through the landing bay. And Battlestar landing bays with opening metallic hatches on your other vids, hmmmm?

Interesting!

Thanks KJ... It was a lot of work put into it... I can see why they have several people working on one thing at CG production companies.

Anyhew, the doors, to me, I believe were probably invisioned to be there originally, but due to cost were left out. I always felt this was what Larson meant to show, when the Vipers launched.

I use 3Ds Max... I thought about using Maya, but I've invested so much time into max... I think I will stick with it, until some effects company hires me to work for them... (in my dreams).

There's more to come and stay tuned.

Thanks for the links... I'll check them out later.

monolith21 May 7th, 2010 01:06 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
I was totally against tampering with any show or movie from the past based solely on the Star Wars special editions. Then I saw the Star Trek episodes done recently and that attitude changed. Mostly because they didn't try to replace the old episodes but simply make new ones to go along with them. Plus they made sure the effects matched the era which looks great!

The added effects on Star Wars stick out like a sore thumb. Not so on the Star Trek episodes. If Battlestar was handled in a similar fashion I could really get into it!

gmd3d May 7th, 2010 01:10 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
I also think its important to keep to the spirit and the feel of the original show take Star Trek TMP Directors Cut .. Robert Wise never got the opportunity to view it before its release. the effects at the time where breath taking. and he had foundation Imaging to rework the effects and add slightly new angles.

keeping the look and feel perfectly down to the image noise on the film.

BSG should have the same to keep it as you say fresh


also

there is a damn good CGI model of the Galactica available already

made by Folkrm

http://www.colonialfleets.com/forums...ad.php?t=15996

others been built

http://www.colonialfleets.com/forums...ad.php?t=17315

made by maudib

and I also think that the scaling errors should also be looked at. in CGI this is possible. other ship easier still .. I posted the Celestra here some years ago it was my second model I built, it good for distance shots . or could be reworked.

if you film the shots as is in the show (the reused one) it would be a waste an effort

KJ May 7th, 2010 04:29 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
I'm back. Was going to stick around to answer and put some more questions down, but had to go off and watch Lost on Sky TV tonight i.e. a repeat showing for me!

Anyways back on track, yeah i'd say Robert Wise's ST:TMP is a fine example of SE done right. Its got a different audio effect track mind you, but its been enhanced as a updated Star Trek was expected to look and feel etc. Star Wars SE while a little controversial did fix some necessary issues with the older film and update and repair what was needed in the right areas (Yavin 4 Base exterior, X-Wing Vs Tie-Fighter battle) and so forth. And as we all know, its failing were the main selling point for editor Adywan to fix up and do the SW SE films properly through fan determination and love of the OT.

And Adywan isn't a CGI hog himself neither but is simply going about improving the Star Wars films where the SE should've.

Anybody checked out his recent clip of his Bespin approach yet?.....

Adywan's Empire: Revisited - Bespin Approach [ Vaderios Split Screen ]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAPNuxqOreI

Love the pan, but i hope he keeps it to a minimum seeing as too much digital tweaks might be what the naysayers are clearly worried about.

If we were to whack up this list however; just how many tweaked or re-edits are going about improving Sci-fi shows/films exactly?

* Star Wars/Empire Revisted

* Star Trek Remastered

* Red Dwarf SE/updated

* Space 2099 (recently)

* Several Dr Who original series episodes/stories (The Five Doctors, The Black Guardian Saga/Trilogy)


Wouldn't mind added Battlestar to the list to be honest! Cos mostly none of those others are opting for a HD Blu-Ray treatment (except ST:R), which any official recut would opt for in light of the Blu-Ray format taking off now!

I'd also like to add, the fact that other SE/remastered cuts suffered from lack of any real budget or time necessary to do them proper justice leading to wasted opportunities (Superman 2: The Richard Donner Cut). If fans were to do their own project together remastering BG with any connections and resources, at work for example, with the right tools (PC, Mac etc?).

We'd have to set up some goals to avoid those pitfalls.

For example...

1) No stone left unturned.

2) Necessary time alotted for the pieces to come together. ragtag crew of fans willing, fans support (from the fanbase), organisation/resources of those with connections, outline of what to do and plan of events etc.

3) Resources, i.e. PC software at everybody's disposal.

4) No limitations on whats possible. If some new 3D tech comes out while we're doing the project, have it investigated. Check up on new and possible Home Cinema hardware tech (and in that home cinema's website might be of soem use to enquire about any advancements)

5) Physical Models i.e. BG series replicas that are film camera worthy. That once "lit" can easily be shot, and look identical to the '78 SFX BG Apogee shots and slightly improve upon them (i.e. all new camera pans, angles and shots etc).

6) CFF Ad campaign once again. If this were to be a major fan endeavour! This fanbase was such alive when they did these things, if this fanbase is fans doing projects for the majority of fans and sci-fi afictionardos, then why not inspire ourselves with this thing!

7) Get Glen Larson or Tom DeSanto involved. Some "pull" behind the fan efforts behind this project would be incredible. Much better yet, get the fella who got all the DVD extras content for the 2003 DVD's onboard this project and see if he can help with obtaining the stuff that didn't make the complete DVD's set the first time around?!?

8.) Bigger Blu-Ray/DVD media release coverage! Unlike the 2003 DVD's, if this became official, then i reckon like the Star Trek Remastered behind-the-scenes clips, this would need to get lots of attention, if the money were there for the project too. And push this thing with interviews and somebody shooting some fly-on-the-wall documentary footage, thus showing the public the interest this should be getting and how big of an event fans could make it.

9) Bonus features. Discussed earlier on here by myself and others in various threads regarding Galactica and another DVD re-release. - Much needed and not a repeat of the previous 2003 DVD set.

10) Packaging. Fan produced or an official release. We're creative, we got this one right??? Save the best til last as they say!

All i know is, save a bit of "cash" to hire Drew Struzan or Frank Frazetta to do the Blu-Ray cover in killer art! lol, and if not any of them, then go to ComicCon and hire a decent comic book artist or painter. Think big, and have bigger ambitions i reckon!

;)

KJ

Eric Paddon May 7th, 2010 09:18 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by KJ (Post 300315)
With all due respect Eric, thats just probably YOU feeling so! And not the major majority feeling of everybody else who's an original series Galactica fan.

I don't think there's been a scientific study of the matter. Regardless, I am opposed to the idea completely, because to me it is a matter of general principle that to do this harms completely the integrity of the original work. As far as I'm concerned the only reason why George Lucas so obsessively tinkered with the original trilogy is because that speaks volumes to his general obsession with FX over storytelling and the fact that he doesn't have much confidence in the story to carry the day. For me, a true special edition would involve restoring scenes cut that had to do with enhancing the characters and not giving us a pointless scene from a storytelling standpoint (the Jabba one) that just recapitulates word for word the same dialogue we had in the Greedo scene, and then becomes an excuse to say "Look there, I stuck Boba Fett in!"

Films IMO are not supposed to be tinkered with out of the context of the time they were created in and the same should apply to TV series. If Galactica did the same thing, they would get the same attention from me that the tinkered Trek episodes get from me which is zero. I watch Galactica because the stories interest me and the stories aren't going to be changed one iota by FX sequences that clash with the interior set designs, costuming etc. that were made in another era altogether.

And let's carry this arugment to the non-scifil realm. Should "Gone With The Wind" and "The Wizard Of Oz" be altered with modern CGI FX for the sake of being "with it" with a new generation of audiences, or should the power of what they did at the time they were made in with the tools that were available in that time be respected? I am emphatically for the latter and just as the idea of a CGI enhanced burning of Atlanta would make me cringe, so too would the prospect of seeing the Galactica I have never become bored with over the yahrens altered make me cringe as well. Let Galactica's merits as a fine piece of storytelling in the era it was produced carry the day with its ability to connect with future generations.

Or let's cite another example. Which version of "King Kong" is still going to remembered as a classic a generation from now? The 1933 one with its "dated" special FX or Jackson's bloated 2005 CGI self-indulgence that was one of the most boring times of my life in a theater? That to me, sums it up as to why CGI has nothing to do with whether or not a film from the past is worthy of being called a classic or not. It's the story and the acting and the directing that carries the day ultimately. To suggest otherwise IMO cheapens the integrity of the original product (this is also why I'm opposed to replacing musical scores with new scores composed decades after the fact as was done on the expanded version of the 1965 western "Major Dundee")

Now I'll admit, that speaking as one whose training is in the world of history and archiving, the matter of preserving the *original* work that was created at the time does matter a good deal to me from a professional standpoint, and I fear that Lucas's self-indulgent obsession means that future generations will never get to see Star Wars as I first experienced it, and when it was frankly a much better film. Instead, we have seen Star Wars irrevocably damaged for the sake of synching up to some lousy films Lucas made two decades later that represented the triumph of CGI over good storytelling because there wasn't even a decent remastering of the original version done.

monolith21 May 7th, 2010 10:08 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon (Post 300327)
And let's carry this arugment to the non-scifil realm. Should "Gone With The Wind" and "The Wizard Of Oz" be altered with modern CGI FX for the sake of being "with it" with a new generation of audiences, or should the power of what they did at the time they were made in with the tools that were available in that time be respected?

I am emphatically for the latter and just as the idea of a CGI enhanced burning of Atlanta would make me cringe, so too would the prospect of seeing the Galactica I have never become bored with over the yahrens altered make me cringe as well. Let Galactica's merits as a fine piece of storytelling in the era it was produced carry the day with its ability to connect with future generations.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying here, however the "Gone with the Wind" etc. analogy doesn't quite work for me. Some things lend themselves to "tinkering" and some don't. Sci Fi has that uniqueness to it that many other genres do not.

The thing that particularly would lend itself where Galactica relates is the stock footage. I've never gotten sick of the original either, but I would love to see those battles from other angles for sure.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not for destroying the originals. I do not believe one should replace the other. Just like they did with Star Trek, I think it would just be for a new viewing experience. When I watch Star Trek I usually watch the originals, but I was really into those enhanced episodes when they came out.

Eric Paddon May 7th, 2010 10:31 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Then I guess where we part company is that I don't regard sci-fi as anymore special a genre from a filmmaking standpoint than any other one that has required what we call "special effects" to tell part of its story. "The Ten Commandments" is not what we call a "sci-fi" movie, but its strength lay in the fact that Cecil B. DeMille used the tools of his time to sell the illusion of the Red Sea parting. But even when we consider the world of sci-fi, are we honestly going to be doing this tinkering with films from an even earlier era like "Forbidden Planet" and "War Of The Worlds"? If anything, I look at these films and TV shows from an earlier era with their limitiations and find that when there are limits, it has the effect of making me think more about the *story*, in effect getting me to use my imagination more and let my mind be sucked into the reality of the setting that the actors, writers and director have created. The limited FX of the day becomes a conceit I can accept simply because the compensation is stronger on the other end, which are the elements today's CGI-laden movies have IMO totally forgotten how to do properly. So perhaps I suffer from an instinctive dislike of CGI simply because I associate it with a style of storytelling I've come to have no use for as I get older.

The only restorations I approve of are when movies that were cut down from their original roadshow cuts are then restored back to their original versions as we saw with "Lawrence Of Arabia" or "The Alamo" because that's using the materials that were made *in that era* and giving us the kind of viewing experience that those who first experienced those films got to see. The end product is enhanced but remains a product of its time.

gmd3d May 8th, 2010 04:25 AM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Sci-fi for me presents a larger and broader canvas than other story types.

CGI is just a tool to enhance the visuals fix the errors that are present in the original film.

The Special Effect in the Classic BSG Series are now showing their age.. and are now dull and repetitive and need revitalization and thatīs how I see it. and new effect will only enhance the viewing experience.

When I got the DVD set I was disappointed that the effect where not improved at all. and what was done is rubbish showing more errors that ruin the look for the movie.

Lucas knows this and has over time reworked his original Star Wars saga keeping it fresh and exciting and is still making money from it.

He also did Indiana Jones films .. to my knowledge they have not been touched or reworked with special effect for they donīt need it.

CGI is the way to go for BSG.

Eric Paddon May 8th, 2010 11:15 AM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Taranis (Post 300330)
Sci-fi for me presents a larger and broader canvas than other story types.

CGI is just a tool to enhance the visuals fix the errors that are present in the original film.

I don't agree with the presumption that what was the top of the line for its day and a giant leap ahead of the age of "Forbidden Planet" (where's the clamoring to redo that one where the look is more "dated"?) constitutes an "error".

Quote:

When I got the DVD set I was disappointed that the effect where not improved at all. and what was done is rubbish showing more errors that ruin the look for the movie.
What I saw for the first time was a quality release that restored the episodes to the brilliance they demonstrated in 1978 and were presented "uncut* in contrast to first the beat-up 16mm prints used in syndication repeats throughout the 1980s and then the cleaned-up but hacked versions from the Sci-Fi Channel, loaded with more extra content than any other TV series of the day has gotten on DVD, which says a lot.

Quote:

Lucas knows this and has over time reworked his original Star Wars saga keeping it fresh and exciting and is still making money from it.
I again do not accept that premise. If anything, I believe that Lucas's tinkering with SW is generally more a cover for the fact that he hasn't had one fresh idea as a writer/director since SW.

gmd3d May 8th, 2010 01:28 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon (Post 300332)
I don't agree with the presumption that what was the top of the line for its day and a giant leap ahead of the age of "Forbidden Planet" (where's the clamoring to redo that one where the look is more "dated"?) constitutes an "error".



What I saw for the first time was a quality release that restored the episodes to the brilliance they demonstrated in 1978 and were presented "uncut* in contrast to first the beat-up 16mm prints used in syndication repeats throughout the 1980s and then the cleaned-up but hacked versions from the Sci-Fi Channel, loaded with more extra content than any other TV series of the day has gotten on DVD, which says a lot.



I again do not accept that premise. If anything, I believe that Lucas's tinkering with SW is generally more a cover for the fact that he hasn't had one fresh idea as a writer/director since SW.

I believe that this is wrong approach for BSG and its not presumption but a current fact that most movies are been reworked and reinvented.. we have seen the BSG one and it split the fanbase in two.

Classic Star Trek had a face lift (I got them)
Classic Star Wars Had a face lift (I got them)
improved DVD sales: yes you bet they did

Classic Battlestar Galactica
No new effect just enhanced some what .. and disappointing so.
.. not as mush as it would if the Effect where improved and expanded
as it needs. if it was done and done properly I would by a new DVD set no problem.

I would not rework or redo the forbidden planet as it simply does not need it.
it is a product of its time.

BSG series need new effects . up dated effect at the least the reuse of the same effects is tiresome and boring .. and I have watch my DVD set a few time and it what bothers me the most.


In the Movie the Galactica model support beam is seen in some effect.. in the new DVDs too ..and to be honest it destroyed the whole experience of the film.

Lucas is a better sales man than Universal or who ever owns the Classic show. and I disagree that Lucas is short of ideas ..

but I believe that without a refreshing effects for the classic BSG the appeal of the show will wither.

Donīt get me wrong I like the show a lot and as much as Star Trek and Star Wars.

Eric Paddon May 8th, 2010 01:49 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Taranis (Post 300333)
I would not rework or redo the forbidden planet as it simply does not need it.
it is a product of its time.

And so should all other films and TV shows be so recognized. Galactica was as much a product of its time as Star Trek was of the late 1960s and in fact to see Trek gussied up in a way to try and suggest it is NOT a product of the late 1960s strikes me as being dishonest. Maybe we should also have the lines about World Wars from the 1990s being redubbed as wel to further sell the illusionl?

Quote:

In the Movie the Galactica model support beam is seen in some effect.. in the new DVDs too ..and to be honest it destroyed the whole experience of the film.
"King Kong" from 1933 still used obvious back projection by today's standards but I don't see anyone suggesting a CGI makeover and Jacksonizing the original would improve that.

Quote:

Lucas is a better sales man than Universal or who ever owns the Classic show. and I disagree that Lucas is short of ideas ..
If Lucas were a font of ideas, then his creative output since Star Wars would be a lot more than "Howard The Duck", "Radioland Murders" and a series of not very stellar prequel movies. For 25 years since ROTJ he can be said to have done nothing but coast on the original SW trilogy by concocting all kinds of ways to repackage the only thing that ever brought him big money. That makes him a smart capitalist, but a creative genius with a knack for quality storytelling it isn't.

gmd3d May 8th, 2010 02:03 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon (Post 300334)
And so should all other films and TV shows be so recognized. Galactica was as much a product of its time as Star Trek was of the late 1960s and in fact to see Trek gussied up in a way to try and suggest it is NOT a product of the late 1960s strikes me as being dishonest. Maybe we should also have the lines about World Wars from the 1990s being redubbed as wel to further sell the illusionl?



"King Kong" from 1933 still used obvious back projection by today's standards but I don't see anyone suggesting a CGI makeover and Jacksonizing the original would improve that.



If Lucas were a font of ideas, then his creative output since Star Wars would be a lot more than "Howard The Duck", "Radioland Murders" and a series of not very stellar prequel movies.

yes Star Trek was a product of its time and was still reworked as it has a massive fan base for it to appeal too. Forbidden Planet would not have that kind of fan base at all.... both Trek and Wars have inherited new fans in recent years a new generations have come on board,

Classic BSG still attracts new fans and possibly one the strength of the new show too so the market is still there. ready to go

Lucas did create Indiana Jones films also very successful along with Star Wars. and other stories too . so I donīt agree with this
Quote:

If Lucas were a font of ideas, then his creative output since Star Wars would be a lot more than "Howard The Duck", "Radioland Murders" and a series of not very stellar prequel movies.
I liked the prequelīs Star wars for the most part. :D

I respect your opinion on the subject but I still think as it stands it will hurt it in the future .. and will look dated compared to the epic story. I think it started to hurt now . as I watched it again today and I still think it needs new effects ...

Eric Paddon May 8th, 2010 02:22 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Taranis (Post 300335)
yes Star Trek was a product of its time and was still reworked as it has a massive fan base for it to appeal too.

The massive fan base already existed. I'm not buying the argument that this was what was needed to rejuvenate interest in Trek anymore than I'd buy the argument that tampering with the original SW trilogy was needed to rejuvenate interest and appreciation for those films. When we can see movies from the 30s still have long-term appeal *exactly* the way they were first made, we should have enough faith in the storytelling ability of the originals in Sci-Fi to do the same. Because to do otherwise is to suggest somehow that the contributions of the actors/writers and director is somehow less important to the strength of the material than the FX. For me, Galactica's long-term reasonance is rooted entirely in my greater appreciation for what was done in the storytelling beyond the FX that was done in the best possible way for the time it was made in but which needed those other elements to stand out.

Quote:

Lucas did create Indiana Jones films also very successful along with Star Wars. and other stories too . so I donīt agree with this
Without Spielberg, I doubt very much those end up to be big moneymakers. The bottom line is that if Lucas were really such a great creative genius he would have kept writing and directing more works of great originality over a 25 year span than what does have his name on it. Cecil B. DeMille he isn't.

Quote:

I respect your opinion on the subject but I still think as it stands it will hurt it in the future .. and will look dated compared to the epic story. I think it started to hurt now . as I watched it again today and I still think it needs new effects ...
As things turned out, "Miracle On 34th Street" and "It's A Wonderful Life" didn't need colorization to endure as classics. If we really have faith in what Galactica was able to do on its own, then let the work stand on its own like all other films and TV shows are supposed to do. Sci-Fi does not deserve to be treated as a separate category from all other genres of cinematic storytelling.

gmd3d May 8th, 2010 02:48 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon (Post 300336)
The massive fan base already existed. I'm not buying the argument that this was what was needed to rejuvenate interest in Trek anymore than I'd buy the argument that tampering with the original SW trilogy was needed to rejuvenate interest and appreciation for those films. When we can see movies from the 30s still have long-term appeal *exactly* the way they were first made, we should have enough faith in the storytelling ability of the originals in Sci-Fi to do the same. Because to do otherwise is to suggest somehow that the contributions of the actors/writers and director is somehow less important to the strength of the material than the FX. For me, Galactica's long-term reasonance is rooted entirely in my greater appreciation for what was done in the storytelling beyond the FX that was done in the best possible way for the time it was made in but which needed those other elements to stand out.



Without Spielberg, I doubt very much those end up to be big moneymakers. The bottom line is that if Lucas were really such a great creative genius he would have kept writing and directing more works of great originality over a 25 year span than what does have his name on it. Cecil B. DeMille he isn't.



As things turned out, "Miracle On 34th Street" and "It's A Wonderful Life" didn't need colorization to endure as classics. If we really have faith in what Galactica was able to do on its own, then let the work stand on its own like all other films and TV shows are supposed to do. Sci-Fi does not deserve to be treated as a separate category from all other genres of cinematic storytelling.

Well I disagree with you on this matter,,and I never said anything about rejuvenating interest in these show. as that the new effects in these shows enhanced the viewing experience. modernizing them for new generations

what I am talking about is to do with cleaning up the errors in the effects of BSG they can be shot with the same views and aspects if that what people want .. but should be fixed .. it take away from the film and show.
Like in Star Trek TMP ... it enhanced the viewing experience and took nothing way from it and added every thing to it. imo

Bottom line for me is that the effect need to be reworked and improved .. and that's my view on it and it been that way for some time.

KJ May 8th, 2010 07:42 PM

Re: Remastered BattleStar Galatica?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Taranis
Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Paddon
I don't agree with the presumption that what was the top of the line for its day and a giant leap ahead of the age of "Forbidden Planet" (where's the clamoring to redo that one where the look is more "dated"?) constitutes an "error".



What I saw for the first time was a quality release that restored the episodes to the brilliance they demonstrated in 1978 and were presented "uncut* in contrast to first the beat-up 16mm prints used in syndication repeats throughout the 1980s and then the cleaned-up but hacked versions from the Sci-Fi Channel, loaded with more extra content than any other TV series of the day has gotten on DVD, which says a lot.


I again do not accept that premise. If anything, I believe that Lucas's tinkering with SW is generally more a cover for the fact that he hasn't had one fresh idea as a writer/director since SW.


I believe that this is wrong approach for BSG and its not presumption but a current fact that most movies are been reworked and reinvented.. we have seen the BSG one and it split the fanbase in two.

Classic Star Trek had a face lift (I got them)
Classic Star Wars Had a face lift (I got them)
improved DVD sales: yes you bet they did

Classic Battlestar Galactica
No new effect just enhanced some what .. and disappointing so.
.. not as mush as it would if the Effect where improved and expanded
as it needs. if it was done and done properly I would by a new DVD set no problem.

I would not rework or redo the forbidden planet as it simply does not need it.
it is a product of its time.

BSG series need new effects . up dated effect at the least the reuse of the same effects is tiresome and boring .. and I have watch my DVD set a few time and it what bothers me the most.


In the Movie the Galactica model support beam is seen in some effect.. in the new DVDs too ..and to be honest it destroyed the whole experience of the film.

Lucas is a better sales man than Universal or who ever owns the Classic show. and I disagree that Lucas is short of ideas ..

but I believe that without a refreshing effects for the classic BSG the appeal of the show will wither.

Donīt get me wrong I like the show a lot and as much as Star Trek and Star Wars.


Believe and support what your saying Taranis 100% Well said :thumbsup:


Mr Paddon quit the procrastination seriously, take a look at the thread since you've posted? :( :wtf:

If you disagree with everybody on Matador thread fair enough. But this isn't leading anywhere, when you drag this out about how you don't agree on a topic most of us are interested in. We're trying to take this beyond mere debating and into something worthwhile if the Galactica fanbase moved in this direction or if fans support it enough to make a official campaign. Its one thing to disagee its another to to drag down somebody else's thread harpng on about how you don't like it nor see the point etc etc. Thats been said enough times. I saw you and Taranis having having a few barbs this morning from my clock, then early this afternoon i could've said one thing in a reply or so but figured i've said enough so far and let everybody else talk it out, and went out cos i had things doing in town today!

I didn't expect to comeback and catch an irregular thread fallout with too much arguing, especially in this thread which i've asked the mods to make into a "sticky" and to be put into the; "Shattered Worlds" projects thread instead. So please lets quit the B.S., you've made your statements quite clear enough, however this isn't going anywhere's. Much as i like giving Lucas a good *bashing* online, i will also admit the Star Wars SE have their plus points too. Going in circles with this isn't doing us any favors whatsoever and Matador's thread should really stay on topic. There's really nothing you can add by disgreeing but yet continue dragging a thread down into arguing with a set of viewpoints, others are not going to agree with and follow nor latch onto cos they have a different point-of-view and wish to see the topic at hand be come a reality (hopefully).

Seriously, and thats a point of fact and plain good manners in letting Matador's thread be talked about by those that DO share opinions that are beneficial and 'are' of the same viewpoints in general which lead the discussion into going somewhere's.

You shouldn't really be here if your aren't on the same boat as it were or don't enjoy the level of banter we're trying to see that'll grow into something that might work or be of a worthwhile endeavour! I understand you like discussions, but for Matador's sake can we please not let this thread descent into absurdities about whether or not "A Remastered BG" is a good or bad thing? Especially when its only you sharing that point with others on here.

For real, for Matty and everybody else's sake no drawn out arguing please. No "ego" crap in this thread.

KJ


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:57 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.11, Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content and Graphics ©2000-Present Colonial Fleets