my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » SIN CITY (2005) (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: SIN CITY (2005) John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 04-04-2005 10:41 AM                        quote: The only thing really wrong with it is that it is FLAT! (booo, hissss, you suck!!!) The "native" aspect ratio of the Sony HD camera used is 16:9 (1.79:1). Cropping the top and bottom of the image for 2.39:1 would further compromise sharpness. Remember, although the camera CCD sensors are 1920 x 1080 pixels, the needed anti-aliasing filtration reduces the resolution to less than half of that.  |  IP: Logged Wolff King Morrow Master Film Handler Posts: 490 From: Denton, TX, USA Registered: Feb 2004 posted 04-04-2005 02:11 PM                        I thought anti-aliasing used an interpolation of pixels to smooth the edges without sacrificing resolution? I know that on my image rendering work I do, I can enlarge the image and then resample it down to the original resolution to remove jaggies. Anyway, this film looked noticably sharp. Combined with the film cleaner I hooked up with film guard saturation, it was probably the sharpest picture I've yet seen (and on my largest screen to boot). I also give it 4 out of 5 stars.  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 04-04-2005 02:28 PM                        Anti-aliasing filtration makes sure there is no image detail sharp enough to visibly interact with the pixel array to produce jaggies or moire. You have traded away image sharpness. Don't mistake true sharpness (i.e., the ability to resolve fine detail) with edge-enhancement that gives the appearance of sharpness if you sit far enough away from the screen.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 04-04-2005 03:16 PM                     quote: John Pytlak Cropping the top and bottom of the image for 2.39:1 would further compromise sharpness. As does projecting anything in the 35mm flat format vs. the larger frame area of the 35mm scope format!  |  IP: Logged Aaron Garman Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1470 From: Toledo, OH USA Registered: Mar 2003 posted 04-04-2005 06:48 PM                     I figure if it is native 16:9, it'd look better that way instead of being cropped to 2.39:1. Now if we're talking anamorphic negative, then that is a different story. Even Super35 can look AWFUL in scope. That'd be nice if they develop a cinemascope lense of sorts for HD cameras that would work like real cinemascope, except without the film. AJG  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 04-04-2005 07:13 PM                     Super 35 can also look fantastic. It's all in how it's done. Let's take this into a new thread in FHF since we are way too off topic here. The next reply can start it and link back to this thread.  |  IP: Logged Richard Greco Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1180 From: Plant City, FL Registered: Nov 2003 posted 04-04-2005 08:43 PM                     Agreed....WOW This was freakin awesome! Definately a DVD buy. I saw this at an indoor so I could hear the DTS and it sounded great too. Does anyone know what scene Tarantino directed? 4.5/5  |  IP: Logged Sam Graham AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues. Posts: 1431 From: Waukee, IA Registered: Dec 2004 posted 04-04-2005 08:54 PM                        ***SPOILER...sort of...*** Mr. Ebert says Tarantino's scene is "the scene in the car with (Clive) Owen and (Benicio) Del Toro, who has a pistol stuck in his head".  |  IP: Logged Richard Greco Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1180 From: Plant City, FL Registered: Nov 2003 posted 04-04-2005 09:09 PM                     You know, I can see him behind the camera in that one. It was twisted enough to be him. Awesome Flick  |  IP: Logged Dean Kollet Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 591 From: Florida State University Registered: Jul 2003 posted 04-07-2005 09:54 PM                     I loved this movie, but I wish the stories connected a little bit better.... 4.5 out of 5 Carla Gugino is hot  |  IP: Logged Richard Greco Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1180 From: Plant City, FL Registered: Nov 2003 posted 04-09-2005 12:01 PM                     One thing I did notice is how bad Michael Madsen acted in his scenes. All his lines seemed forced. Still a kickass movie though.  |  IP: Logged Kurt Zupin Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 989 From: Maricopa, Arizona Registered: Oct 2004 posted 04-10-2005 12:06 AM                     Madsen is natorious for crappy acting if he dosn't want to do the film...or if he dosn't believe in the character, he was in Sin City as a favor to some of his friends who were in the film as well as RR and QT  |  IP: Logged Richard Greco Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1180 From: Plant City, FL Registered: Nov 2003 posted 04-10-2005 02:45 AM                     Yeah, he seemed to really be Budd in KB. He also was great in Resivoir Dogs, but not here.  |  IP: Logged Robb Johnston Expert Film Handler Posts: 147 From: St. Louis Suburbs Registered: Nov 1999 posted 04-10-2005 12:29 PM                        I all the comics, there is not as much overlap to connect the stories more. perhaps some gaps will be filled in when and if the other stories are brought to film (via digital camera) For one, there is another story for clive owen's Dwight character that fills in the info about a whole new face. Did they have him referring to Ava when they cut to him in the Marv storyline (I reread the comics since seeing the film so I forget some of what was lef tin and cut out)That one is called "A Dame to Kill For." To artificially add connections to stories so true to the source material would have weakened the piece for me.  |  IP: Logged Emma Tomiak Expert Film Handler Posts: 238 From: Carrollton, TX, USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 04-10-2005 08:10 PM                        I agree Rob, I think that keeping the stories separated works best for someone who has read the graphic novels. I loved that the movie stayed so true to the books. That's very rare in any comic book based movie. For the viewer who hasn't read the books, though, perhaps a bit more connection between the stories might have made the whole film run more smoothly. The only reference to "A Dame to Kill For" was Dwight talking about his new face. He didn't metion Ava at all (at least I think he didn't--I've watched it 3 times, but a fourth time just to check wouldn't hurt ).  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.