Leaderboard
Popular Content
Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/15/20 in all areas
-
3 pointsThanks to your comment I just spent the last 15-20 minutes comparing the songs from both stereo Sgt Pepper and Yellow Sub albums, the Songtrack, and a bit of the mono Sgt Pepper's on youtube lol. I feel like the mono is the most striking version. The stereo Sgt Pepper's, and even the Yellow Sub soundtrack just feel like they have some odd balance choices. While the Yellow Submarine Songtrack IS still stereo, I feel like they fixed a lot of the balance issues so it's closer to the mono version. Not quite there, but it has a much better sound than the other stereo releases. Bless whoever remastered the Songtrack. I'm not sure if that remaster is what's used on the blu-ray. Our TV sound system isn't really good enough for me to tell anyway. Also side note, was disappointed in the captions on the blu-ray. A few errors, plus anytime something like "I think I burnt me finger." came up they wrote "me" as "my", and no attempt to caption Old Fred's frantic yelling until he got to the "blue meanies!" part, even though you clearly hear "submarine" and "explosions" before that EACH TIME.
-
3 pointsMovies were mono at this time (maybe the are exceptions?)). I would summe virtually any streaming or DVD version would be mixed to stereo or 5.1. Maybe mono is an option but I doubt it's the default. So, we probably aren't hearing it as intended for theatres. The Yellow Submarine album was released only in stereo. There was a Yellow Submarine songtrack (not soundtrack) released around 2001 that was remastered and remixed that a lot of people liked. I, being a purist and snob, never listened to it. I would assume modern mixes of the movie utilize this? For Sgt. Pepper (and all the early Beatle albums and even a lot of albums at the time) were definitely mixed differently for mono and stereo. Sgt. Pepper and the white album definitely have notable differences for many songs. Some are even at very different speeds. Some have different sound effects entirely. The main reason for the differences are that more people had mono systems at home in 1967 and more care was put into mono mixing (at least for The Beatles). I don't know why they didn't mix in stereo and simply fold it into a single channel but I assume they had a reason. The mono version of Sgt. Pepper was released in 1967 but stopped being available as stereo became the standard. I don't think it was officially released again until the Beatles remasters in 2010 (or so, I don't remember the exact year).
-
2 pointsI tried to rent this and couldn’t find it. It was a movie I saw in early childhood and have revisited throughout the years. It’s definitely an animated LSD trip (although since I’ve never taken LSD, I’m making an assumption and you know the old saying: when you assume, it makes you into an asshole. Or something like that).
-
2 pointsTo comment on the other Beatles movies . . . Ringo tended to get a lot of focus because he was the best actor. He's the only member who had any kind of career as an actor after the Beatles. But it is kind of incredible that a band formed entirely on their own and just to play music (like, not a boy band where some producer is picking "types") wound up with four guys who were all also charming personalities who could hold up on screen. AND the music was also consistently great. We'll probably never see anything like that again.
-
2 pointsI saw this movie once, on a big screen in a beautiful old theater. I think that's the right way to see it: surrounded by the colors and music and such, not distracted by anything else. It's very enjoyable that way. I'm sure on the small screen it loses something.
-
2 pointsI just read this on the Yellow Submarine article on wikipedia and I think we dodged a bullet
-
1 pointI'm ready to dance but my father keeps chickening out
-
1 point
-
1 point
-
1 pointLook at the range of emotion in a mere two seconds. The subtlety and nuance of those raised eyebrows. Where is this man's Oscar?
-
1 point
-
1 pointPeople say more knowledgeable than me have made lists detailing all the differences between mono and stereo Pepper and White Album of you want to Google them. The weirdest is Helter Skelter where the stereo version has an extra coda on the end. I've always loved the idea of someone owning the mono version and getting the stereo version on CD after 20 years and being blown away by that. If I can "well, actually..." myself, a mono version of the Yellow Submarine soundtrack doesn't exist but the songs original to it were eventually released in mono on the mono version of Past Masters a few years ago. The orchestral songs have never been released in mono.
-
1 pointSerious shade being thrown at Paul Mccartney's amazing performance in Give My Regards To Broadstreet.
-
1 pointI found an article about the Sgt. Pepper's album that said people weren't hearing it as intended until a recent anniversary box set. Since it had been recorded in mono special tricks were used to enhance the sound. All the stereo mixes most people heard lost a lot of the special audio. I'm wondering if the movie is a similar way. We might not be hearing the movie the way it was mixed for at the time?
-
1 point
-
1 pointThis episode made me happy. Thank you
-
1 pointSleep away camp, but I’m a champ, no idea why my pants are damp.
-
1 pointJaws I never followed up in our conversation in the Star Wars thread (short of time/etc) - but with that question I was just toying with the idea of someone going, "Here's a list of the greatest 100 American Movies of All Time. Included: A comedy that I do not find funny." Admittedly, Strangelove is that odd case where I can imagine a case being argued ("While I found the intended comedy too flat and calculated, I did find the American deterrence strategy terrifying and absurd when thought about. And no other movie I can think of conveyed the stupidity of it, and possible all human extinction, as aggressively as it did." But still, it is odd to see someone say a movie, that to them effectively failed in one of its key presentations - to make the viewer laugh - is better than possibly some other political commentary movies that did not fail in its genre (to the viewer making the list). I'm assuming you voted "yes" in the poll, since no one has voted "no" yet. However, you may have abstained (in which case my comments aren't relevant). It feels like these things ebb and flow. Kubrick himself said he wanted to do a horror movie because these other respected directors had made these great horror movies (I believe Rosemary's Baby, and The Exorcist were the two he was thinking of). And I think The Shining initially had troubles just because it was longer than what the public's attention span had become. Hence the European cut being about 1/2 hour shorter (Kubrick re-cut it after its initial release was disappointing in Europe. Though I've never heard of it struggling in the US like The Thing did). I think the respect the genre had started to gather started to plummet in the 80s with the rise of the slasher franchises. Anyhow, fwiw, on the BFI poll, you don't see any of the non-Pyscho type of horror movies in the top 100, but if you look in the next 100, you see Don't Look Now, The Shining, and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre at spots: 127, 154, 183. A little further down still and you see Videodrome at 202 (because I guess The Fly and Naked Lunch are just too mainstream). And on the They Shoot Pictures variant for horror movies, "They Shoot Zombies Don't They - top 1000 horror movies of all time" (which is supposed to be an aggregate of various lists found over the net), up until a few years ago, The Shining was at the top of the list. Then at some point, it slipped to number 2 behind The Exorcist. Me, these days, the Kubrick I put right up next to 2001 as being my choice for best Kubricks is Barry Lyndon. How "American" it is, I'd just leave it to other people to debate.
-
1 pointThis is too bad.. ”According to the book "The 50 Greatest Movies Never Made" by Chris Gore, a sequel called "Strawberry Fields Forever" was being worked on at one point. It was to be first computer-generated movie ever. The movie was to utilize many songs from The Beatles. Ten minutes of test footage was shot, and has never been seen.“
-
1 pointI thought that too! I was convinced that she hated her for being her step mom... Also for you know shooting her dad.
This leaderboard is set to Los Angeles/GMT-08:00
-
Newsletter