|
Xenomrph posted:Did you see my question a little bit earlier in the thread on when backer discs are expected to ship? After the disc manufacturer sends them to me and before they reach store shelves. When I have something more specific, I'll send out an update. bunnielab posted:Are there any plans in the works to stream this thing somewhere somehow? I'd love to see it but have no desire to own any more physical media. I'm very curious to see it because part of the charm of Manos, to me anyway, was how bad it looked. It added such a layer of creepiness and general weirdness but I actually think that contributed to some of the "it so bad it's good" pleasure of it. That's a question for Synapse- they have the VOD rights. Which surprised me, because to my knowledge they haven't gone very much into streaming so far. Ben Solo fucked around with this message at 05:04 on Sep 2, 2015 |
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:57 |
|
|
Ben Solo posted:After the disc manufacturer sends them to me and before they reach store shelves. When I have something more specific, I'll send out an update. Also would you be willing/interested in autographing the back of the bluray case insert? No seriously, I think it'd be pretty cool to have the signature of the guy who coordinated all of this on the movie case.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:That's awesome, thanks! If you'd like that, just message me about it via Kickstarter so I can identify your shipment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 05:53
|
|
|
Ben Solo posted:That's a question for Synapse- they have the VOD rights. Which surprised me, because to my knowledge they haven't gone very much into streaming so far. I'm curious if Don is exploring this option. ShoutFactory and Vinegar Syndrome are both opening streaming services. Charles Band has his own too that's been going for a while. There's also some other niche horror streaming service that just started as well. I'm not an expert, but it seems like maybe the cost of operating such a service (at a smaller scale) is worth it for smaller distributors who have experienced dwindling physical sales. Anything that keeps them going is fine with me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted:Yeah, uh, Wizard of Goatse, do you think Monkey Jesus was an improvement on the original fresco? Because that's the kind of argument you're making. It's okay to admit you said a dumb thing, you don't have to quadruple down on it. actually I'd say the blind, flailing panic that word has inspired ITT suggests I hit a lot closer to home than I was initially thinking Zogo posted:What is important is subjective. Therefore I will humbly put forth the basic metric/rubric that anything that's been released in theaters anywhere on planet Earth better have a public libraries don't bother me, I also can deal with it when public libraries don't have a book in circulation (they don't have most books in circulation). My point is simply that movies are extremely hard to archive and there is a finite amount of resources available (a point people here are constantly ducking with frankly bizarre paranoiac fantasies of the evil plutocrats gloating and counting their lucre over a bonfire made out of complete Metropolis reels). You factually cannot save everything, only a few people have even made vague attempts to define the scale of 'everything' and been blown off by others here who for incomprehensible reasons imagine it's nbd to preserve every home movie and local talk show and every other thing subject to entropy indefinitely and everyone is just being lazy. our current system for determining what gets priority for being passed down the generations is pretty patchwork and flawed but it is better by miles at triaging the most important stuff before it gets lost forever than must save old johnny carsons and honeycomb ads!!! the fact is that you have no standards, no real sense of the value or nature of film, and no appreciation of even what currently exists. you want everything that ever passed through a camera because you've done the math and 'all' is numerically superior to 'some', but when I name three classic movies you talk as though those three are all that there are, rather than a shorthand for, again, more footage than you could see in a lifetime, even if you just limited yourself to great movies. maybe that's true for you, and the problem is you can't find any old movies because you don't know any old movies and when I say their names they just pop into existence. If you would like, we can skip this whole conversation and I can create for you more hours of film than you can count just by pasting up a comprehensive list of pre-1980 IMDB titles. I guarantee you, there will be more where Citizen Kane came from. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
If you insist on criteria on what should be saved, how about all feature length films? Is that good enough for you? Will you kindly shut the gently caress up now? Also, you type like a god drat retard and it makes it impossible to take you seriously.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
Yaws posted:If you insist on criteria on what should be saved, how about all feature length films? Is that good enough for you? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtDnqcs786Q 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
On one level I kind of get what you're saying, but it just seems weird to be so passionate about it. I mean who's it hurting? Like all hobbies, film preservation is possibly not necessary, but I don't see that as a problem. It feels like one of those "but you could be using all that time and effort to CURE CANCER!" type of arguments.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 02:39
|
|
|
I'm not particularly, except inasmuch as I do think individuals can actually do something to preserve important obscure works (this thread containing an example) if they actually try, rather than making it an insurmountable cosmic task for omnipotent entities, but y'know it's also kinda taken a lot more words than I expected to get people to accept 'it is actually dumb to pretend that every inch of footage ever made is equally priceless' as anything short of fascism pick a movie (or a book) that's out of print and worth reviving, track down a copy, figure out a nondestructive way to make more copies. don't get bent out of shape about making a complete rolling backup of the entirety of human civilization A Wizard of Goatse fucked around with this message at 03:08 on Sep 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
People like movies and wanna make sure they're preserved. Idgi.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
A Wizard of Goatse posted:the fact is that you have no standards, no real sense of the value or nature of film, and no appreciation of even what currently exists. you want everything that ever passed through a camera because you've done the math and 'all' is numerically superior to 'some', but when I name three classic movies you talk as though those three are all that there are, Three films that you mentioned. I gave you a serious standard in every film being released in theaters. I can't even track down a DVD copy of Kirk Cameron's Saving Christmas at the moment. And contrary to what you're saying it'd be against the law to appropriate film reels due to copyright laws. I'm not interested in home movies or talk shows too much but I would understand if someone was. A Wizard of Goatse posted:rather than a shorthand for, again, more footage than you could see in a lifetime, even if you just limited yourself to great movies. maybe that's true for you, and the problem is you can't find any old movies because you don't know any old movies and when I say their names they just pop into existence. If you would like, we can skip this whole conversation and I can create for you more hours of film than you can count just by pasting up a comprehensive list of pre-1980 IMDB titles. I guarantee you, there will be more where Citizen Kane came from. I see what you mean now. You're thinking people have no taste and would be content to watch anything as a timesink. If that was the case everyone would be content watching live garbage on TV every waking moment. No one is going to approach watching films without using some discretion beforehand. A Wizard of Goatse posted:'it is actually dumb to pretend that every inch of footage ever made is equally priceless' as anything short of fascism I explained that it's a subjective thing on an individual level. A Wizard of Goatse posted:pick a movie (or a book) that's out of print and worth reviving, track down a copy, figure out a nondestructive way to make more copies. don't get bent out of shape about making a complete rolling backup of the entirety of human civilization That's illegal in many instances.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 05:24
|
|
|
InfiniteZero posted:I'm curious if Don is exploring this option. ShoutFactory and Vinegar Syndrome are both opening streaming services. Charles Band has his own too that's been going for a while. There's also some other niche horror streaming service that just started as well. I don't pry too much into Synapse's future plans, but the smart money has always been in treating Blu-ray as something akin to what LaserDisc was (for a certain audience of collectors), not DVD (for absolutely everyone) as the big studios were hoping. Those realistic expectations are part of why genre / boutique labels are kicking so much rear end even as physical media sales are slow... if you ran any business that expected Blu-ray to be the next VHS, you got burned. When they secured VOD rights, it may have been an important part of their future business model, or it may have been a bit like buying an insurance policy. VOD intended for UHD TVs is something we can reasonably expect from Synapse, but how soon might depend on which way the wind blows with "4K Blu-ray". Ben Solo fucked around with this message at 06:31 on Sep 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
I was looking at the synapse box art again and holy poo poo I'm pumped.
GATOS Y VATOS fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Sep 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2015 16:04
|
|
|
My local video store randomly got a couple of copies of the blu ray a few weeks early, so I canceled my Amazon preorder and picked one up. The only versions of the movie I'd seen before were the MST3k and Rifftrax Live versions and, just from what I've seen so far, this looks incredible. Thanks so much and congrats on the release, Ben!
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
You can answer that which Ben will not: pwn posted:So which did you end up going with? Rounded corners, right. Please say rounded corners
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
pwn posted:You can answer that which Ben will not: They're squared.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
Surfingelectrode posted:They're squared.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
pwn posted:Thank you! (And boooooooooo, Ben.) At the end of the day, Don May straight-up refused to do rounded corners. He cited this forum post from Robert Harris as evidence that people wouldn't accept a full aperture on their Blu-ray. Just got the backer discs yesterday myself... Which store did you find your copy in, Surfingelectrode?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
Square corners was the correct decision, and, no disrespect intended, I'm glad Don May was there to be the voice of reason. The movie was never intended to be released in full aperture. Why should this be treated differently than every other film in existence? It "making it look more amateurish" doesn't hold weight because you are artificially creating circumstances that were never intended to exist. Wanting it for lulz or whatever is no better a motivation than people who want unmatted versions of Super 35 films because there's more image there. Like, we could not color correct the scan or incorrectly sync the audio too, would that help make it more hilarious for you?
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
Neo_Reloaded posted:Square corners was the correct decision, and, no disrespect intended, I'm glad Don May was there to be the voice of reason. The movie was never intended to be released in full aperture. Why should this be treated differently than every other film in existence? Don May's decision on the frame size wasn't based on technical considerations, just commercial ones, as he felt he'd have to put a disclaimer before the film to explain to viewers why the framing was "weird". Even so, the frame size is still "weird", just not in a way that anyone will notice. Neither approach I polled people on was true to how the film was originally released- even the one with square corners is just a squared off version of the entire aperture. In both cases, we choose to ignore the tighter "academy" aspect ratio that it was once exhibited in. Our rationale for this was that the film was shot and framed with amateur cameras, not professional cameras, and amateur films are never framed for exhibition in "academy". I won't tell anyone that they're missing out by watching it with square corners, but you would certainly have been missing out if our approach had been accurate to the original exhibition format, which routinely chopped off the tops of people's heads.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
Ben Solo posted:Just got the backer discs yesterday myself... Which store did you find your copy in, Surfingelectrode? Will the store get in trouble if I say? I guess Synapse or whatever the store's distributor is sent them their copies of it and Mosquito early. Really looking forward to watching the movie tomorrow night with some friends. I checked out some of the supplements and thought they were really well put together.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2015 06:37
|
|
|
My desire to see the corners was simply my desire to see them, since this isn't a pro shot film and all. I think the comparison to colour correcting etc is overblown, but not worth arguing about. I'm still gonna get this release. Someday. I haven't had money for a new DVD/blu ray in months and that probably won't change for a while.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2015 07:40
|
|
|
Neo_Reloaded posted:Square corners was the correct decision, and, no disrespect intended, I'm glad Don May was there to be the voice of reason. The movie was never intended to be released in full aperture. Why should this be treated differently than every other film in existence? i just thought it looked cool
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:i just thought it looked cool Same, I dig the home movie feel.
|
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
Surely this can't be the first SA mention in "Playboy", right? Click through for the whole (SFW) thing. Appreciate the quote, ComposerGuy!
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
Ben Solo posted:Surely this can't be the first SA mention in "Playboy", right? Click through for the whole (SFW) thing. It was my first mention though!
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
Truly we have arrived. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
Synapse sent me the bluray early and it arrived at my parents yesterday. Hopefully I get it in the mail soon!
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
That article has to be, by far the most anyone has ever written about Manos: The Hands of Fate. Definitely worth reading from start to finish, though. If anything I want to know more about Rupert's failed train wreck of a sequel.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
Ballz posted:Definitely worth reading from start to finish, though. If anything I want to know more about Rupert's failed train wreck of a sequel. Buy Ben and me a lot of alcohol and oh boy the stories we could tell. Also Rupert was his "stage name," his actual name is Phil Francis. Marshal Prolapse fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Sep 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
I'm just glad to know the sequel isn't happening anymore. Not that I ever would've ended up seeing it, but the very existence of that thing would've been a slap in the face to all of bad movie-dom.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
gfanikf posted:Buy Ben and me a lot of alcohol and oh boy the stories we could tell. I can only imagine. I still think back to his original posts on mst3kinfo where he outright dismissed Ben's restoration and how he planned to do a George Lucas-style "special edition" of Manos.  Sir Lemming posted:I'm just glad to know the sequel isn't happening anymore. Not that I ever would've ended up seeing it, but the very existence of that thing would've been a slap in the face to all of bad movie-dom. It's got nothing to do with Rupert/Phil, but Jackie (Debbie from Manos) is starting to raise money to make a sequel of her own. I'm waiting on details, but I'm far more supportive of her.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
My copy arrived today! Holy mackerel what a journey! Thank's for everything Ben!
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
Hells yes, Manos in my mailbox. A public service has been done here (sort of).
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
Checking in to report the safe arrival of my Blu-Ray. What a long, strange almost-four-years it's been. Thanks so much, Ben.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
Still waiting for mine (which could very well show up the same day my Manos vinyl will arrive) but I just turned it to my local PBS station and they're showing the Manos episode of MST3K. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
What a long, strange trip it's been.Tricky Ed posted:I'm chucking in $100 for this as soon as I get back home after the holidays. You're doing the MaStEr'S wOrK. And the circle closes. Got my copy today, and I'm glad to know I had a hand in restoring something truly unique.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 08:43
|
|
|
Got my blu-ray in the mail to match the t-shirt and poster I got two years ago. This movie is bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 08:59
|
|
|
Actually, Manos is good
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 18:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:57 |
|
|
I actually kind of enjoyed it when we watched it last weekend? It's obviously a horrible movie, but it's just so strange and really like nothing else. Thanks again for making this happen, Ben!
|
|
#
?
Sep 26, 2015 22:52
|
|