|
Milo and POTUS posted:I don't see a duck. Quack Quack 
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2021 20:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 01:45 |
|
|
Hey, I got another one. I’m trying to remember this series of ‘video art’ that from the mid nineties. It was this woman filming herself with this black and white digital video camera made for kids. It may have been late ‘90’s, I don’t think digital video would’ve been cheap enough for a kids’ toy until at least then. They were really short and grainy, and I think it was just her moping around her apartment, maybe something about suicide. I don’t really remember I just remember them being pretty haunting. Ring any bells for anyone?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2021 21:12
|
|
|
Bulgaroctonus posted:Hey, I got another one. I’m trying to remember this series of ‘video art’ that from the mid nineties. Something by Sadie Benning? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadie_Benning Looked up the Fisher-Price camcorder on wikipedia, and looked through ”Productions” for matches. It shot bw video on regular audio cassettes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2021 21:35
|
|
|
Hirayuki posted:Sorry it took so long--I finally got a picture of the canal scene from that First 1000 Words in Spanish book. Imgur was choking on the file, so I put it on Postimage instead. Wow wow this isn't it but it's a memory I forgot I had! It is so kind of you to post this, thank you. In my brain, if we were standing on that huh fucked around with this message at 04:22 on Jul 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2021 23:02
|
|
|
SidneyIsTheKiller posted:...but like the Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan (sans "II") prints and... No one asked but in case anyone's interested, after many years evidence that this actually exists finally turned up on eBay of all places: 
SidneyIsTheKiller fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Jul 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2021 23:07
|
|
|
axolotl farmer posted:Something by Sadie Benning? That’s it! Thank you. I had no idea they were non-binary, sorry if anyone took offense. Also they were in Le Tigre!
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2021 23:20
|
|
|
SidneyIsTheKiller posted:No one asked but in case anyone's interested, after many years evidence that this actually exists finally turned up on eBay of all places: You beat me to the answer, but I was going to ask! I've often wondered if that non-II title screen ever really existed, and this is really exciting. (Looks like a 35mm anamorphic frame. What's the actual item for sale/do you have a link?) Those early releases, apparently with some wiggle room before general release, are really something. I know someone who went to a premiere of Wrath of Khan in 1982 (midwest, had to drive into the city) and swears up and down that there was a big music sting accompanying Scotty's arrival on the bridge cradling Peter Preston. The score as originally recorded does have that (for the next shot, actually, of the wounded Enterprise dead in space), and it's on both 1982 and expanded-decades-later soundtrack albums, with the notes for the latter even indicating that the decision to remove it was a late one although not specifying just when it was taken out. I'd love to know some day if an early release version seen by the public had that or what. Oddly, this same guy never mentioned the II in the title, but I never asked. Since we're on the subject, if it's anyone's own white whale (as it was for me for a while), here's a pretty good (albeit 25 fps) copy of the international prologue to IV, though sadly for the other whale hunter* it still has the normal, non-inverted title: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN3yD8bE2fA (*I'm greatly amused by the connection between figurative and literal whales, though in Star Trek it's humpbacks, of course, not sperm.) Getting even the audio from the original mix of Empire Strikes Back would be amazing, too; even on the Despecialized Edition with its dozens of mixes, the omission of that one and its fancy extra lines saddens me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2021 04:05
|
|
|
Harvey TWH posted:You beat me to the answer, but I was going to ask! I've often wondered if that non-II title screen ever really existed, and this is really exciting. (Looks like a 35mm anamorphic frame. What's the actual item for sale/do you have a link?) All this time I'd always assumed people had just remembered wrong! It does give hope to anyone who's ever sweared that they saw some oddly different version of a movie that before. Harvey TWH posted:Since we're on the subject, if it's anyone's own white whale (as it was for me for a while), here's a pretty good (albeit 25 fps) copy of the international prologue to IV, though sadly for the other whale hunter* it still has the normal, non-inverted title: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN3yD8bE2fA (*I'm greatly amused by the connection between figurative and literal whales, though in Star Trek it's humpbacks, of course, not sperm.) Well, I guess there's no shame in asking, if there's any goons out there that happen to have this particular PAL tape and a VCR hanging around the house somewhere, could you do some complete strangers on the internet a favor and put it on and take a picture of the title screen? If it's on any video release it's this one! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2021 08:27
|
|
|
Harvey TWH posted:Getting even the audio from the original mix of Empire Strikes Back would be amazing, too; even on the Despecialized Edition with its dozens of mixes, the omission of that one and its fancy extra lines saddens me. What's most frustrating about the 70mm cut (if that's the one you're talking about) is that we're still not even 100% sure what all is different about it since it's been so long since anyone's seen it. It was never announced to the public that the movie had changes so no one even knew to look out for any. The Digital Bits recently brought a group of folks together to jog their memories and try to get as clear a picture of the 70mm Empire Strikes Back as they could. https://thedigitalbits.com/columns/history-legacy-showmanship/empire-at-40-remembering-the-early-70mm-cut Adding to the confusion is that there were apparently a few prints that mistakenly went out with unfinished effects shots, so there might be some overlap between "things that were officially changed" and "things that were just an accident." https://comicbook.com/starwars/news/the-empire-strikes-back-visual-effects-unfinished-70mm/
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2021 08:44
|
|
|
Dr. Quarex posted:I will take Salvanis at his word because that would seem pretty obvious to just go see someone else had solved it and act like nobody was going to notice I was catching up on the thread, and I just wanna say I'm happy for you that you found this because this tune owns!
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2021 20:13
|
|
|
Yoshi Jjang posted:I was catching up on the thread, and I just wanna say I'm happy for you that you found this because this tune owns! 🥰 "I loved that last song!"  "Haha, KINGS! Of course you loved the weirdest song that doesn't fit on the compilation at all."🥰 "I made a tape of it."  "What, just that one song?"🥰 "Yes." "Sounds like something someone who likes a song like that would do."Man I thought I was so angsty and angry back then. My taste in music has always given the game away I think.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2021 08:32
|
|
|
SidneyIsTheKiller posted:Good to know I'm not the only weirdo intersted in "same movie just slightly different title!" The ebay listing for the 35mm reels is expired, this was already a few years ago, but I've seen enough contemporaneous corroboration I'm sure it isn't a fake. I got the image from https://forum.fanres.com/thread-2395-page-2.html Ah, gotcha. (And now I've learned from that post that apparently just the 2009 Blu-ray... digitally cleaned a smudge off a step?! How bizarre.) The strange thing to me, and the reason I tended to doubt the claim of the missing "II", is that even the trailers refer to it with the numeral. I'm OK with the second Paramount logo here, in general because I like additions to be just that, additions, not replacing an existing part, but specifically because the logo appears in IV after the Challenger dedication, so to remove it for redundancy really would be cutting into the film. I never saw a non-US print myself, though; how was that version presented theatrically? By the way, all this talk of II, IV, etc., along with knowing what I want to mention below, is reminding me of the addition of numbers to the packaging of the Next Generation movies. Since 2009 I guess, when the new wave of Blu-rays and DVD rereleases began, they seem to be getting VII to X designations on the boxes (not the films themselves, whew!), as if they're part of the official titles, not just a helpful spine designation like British Disney movie numbers. I guess it's useful and no harm done, though. Not being as familiar with them as I am with the first 6, I do tend to have trouble keeping the order straight anyway, although I did recently hit on a partial mnemonic, "GFCI" (as in a power outlet) for the first three (and then N left over), so I'm all set now. SidneyIsTheKiller posted:What's most frustrating about the 70mm cut (if that's the one you're talking about) is that we're still not even 100% sure what all is different about it since it's been so long since anyone's seen it. It was never announced to the public that the movie had changes so no one even knew to look out for any. That is the one I'm talking about. That makes sense, since I've seen lists of changes but they're not always very precise. I learned something from my recent viewing of extras on the Star Trek Generations ("VII") disc, because there was a discussion of running late with special effects shots at ILM, and talk drifted to similar events on ESB. Apparently in 1980 they really did have to send out premiere prints with effects shots that were not satisfactory, finish them up, and then swap them in soon after release. Not ideal but... understandable, I guess. That may be either a new category or a replacement to the "accident" one: stuff that was changed because it was just late. (Compare also tweaks, edits, etc. in the original stereo and mono mixes for Star Wars '77, which may have been more on the reactive side.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2021 15:30
|
|
|
Harvey TWH posted:I'm OK with the second Paramount logo here, in general because I like additions to be just that, additions, not replacing an existing part, but specifically because the logo appears in IV after the Challenger dedication, so to remove it for redundancy really would be cutting into the film. I never saw a non-US print myself, though; how was that version presented theatrically? I presume it went Dedication > Paramount > Prologue > Main Titles but then of course I've never seen if myself. I've run across an old post that claims the opening credits used the film's marketing logo as seen below--complete with the probe's volleyball-like extension in place of the "o" !!   That's.... something I'll have to see with my own eyes before I can believe it.Harvey TWH posted:Since 2009 I guess, when the new wave of Blu-rays and DVD rereleases began, they seem to be getting VII to X designations on the boxes (not the films themselves, whew!), as if they're part of the official titles, not just a helpful spine designation like British Disney movie numbers. Yep just like for years they'd slap "INDIANA JONES" on boxes of Raiders of the Lost Ark, which I believe was mostly to ensure all the series titles would be placed together on a shelf more than it was a serious attempt at renaming the movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2021 21:23
|
|
|
SidneyIsTheKiller posted:Crossposting from the Sci-fi Wifi, this is less a "white whale" than an annoying itch I can't scratch: LOOKING FOR THIS?? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-geS_dS0nk
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2021 21:27
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:LOOKING FOR THIS?? omg  I was wrong-- I'm seeing it and I STILL don't believe it. That is so much more amazing than I had EVER imagined! We must petition this title screen to be restored in glorious 4K! It says it was just uploaded the other day - did you or some other friendly goon do this in response to my post? Either way, sincerely: thank you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2021 22:03
|
|
|
I don't find any of this star trek video minutiae talk particularly interesting but somehow it is enthralling. And my favourite white whale to witness found.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2021 22:28
|
|
|
SidneyIsTheKiller posted:omg Nah, I saw your posts and just entered a few things into youtube, hoping to get lucky (Though I rarely am!) I think I entered something like "The Voyage Home PAL VHS" and that Australian result popped up a few videos down.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2021 22:55
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Nah, I saw your posts and just entered a few things into youtube, hoping to get lucky (Though I rarely am!) I think I entered something like "The Voyage Home PAL VHS" and that Australian result popped up a few videos down. Gawrsh I must've just given up too soon then (or perhaps I'd been too focused searching for UK tapes). huh posted:I don't find any of this star trek video minutiae talk particularly interesting but somehow it is enthralling. And my favourite white whale to witness found. I'm trying to think of an analogy for something that just completely blows past all expectations and all I can think of is "it's like expecting the Excelsior and getting the Enterprise-A" which may or may not be helpful. But I'm glad we could make the search for a highly specific geeky nonsense an entertaining read!
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2021 23:25
|
|
|
Well, that's quite a video, and this one truly an answer to a question I was never going to ask. Also an answer to one I have held on to: note that this one contains a special 75th-anniversary Paramount logo, and all the "The Voyage Home: Star Trek IV" material refers to the year 1987, when it's a 1986 movie. I had read vague notes that some original versions went out with a 75th-anniversary logo, but in decades of home video and one 35mm print I was able to see a few years ago it was never anything but normal. Paramount dates back to 1912, as I finally looked up, so perhaps it's only regions where the movie was released in 1987 that got that!SidneyIsTheKiller posted:Yep just like for years they'd slap "INDIANA JONES" on boxes of Raiders of the Lost Ark, which I believe was mostly to ensure all the series titles would be placed together on a shelf more than it was a serious attempt at renaming the movie. I thought of that too. That also only changes on the printed material, correct, never in the movie itself? (And on that note: has the reported original Last Crusade line about the finest Jewish families in Germany, or whatever, ever turned up?) In fact, the alternate title even made a minor wave on Jeopardy last June (https://j-archive.com/showgame.php?game_id=6682), when a contestant gave the longer box title and was ruled incorrect, then given credit after the judges realized she wasn't really to blame. Davros1 posted:Nah, I saw your posts and just entered a few things into youtube, hoping to get lucky (Though I rarely am!) I think I entered something like "The Voyage Home PAL VHS" and that Australian result popped up a few videos down. That video also has an upload date of 5 days ago. Whoever did it, 2 days before the seed (the... space seed?) popped up in this thread, has an amazing prescient sense of timing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2021 23:59
|
|
|
There is a photoshop of George from Seinfeld holding Soul Edge while making this face on a transparent background. Does anyone have it? I wanna make an avatar out of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 01:47
|
|
|
Looking up one white whale just leads to another: turns out UCLA has been quietly keeping a Star Trek II workprint this entire time. https://mobile.twitter.com/TrapperSeanMD/status/1313894842439614465 Word is it's got nearly everything we'd heard about pver the years or had only seen little bits and pieces of leaked here and there: Romulan Saavik, Khan's child (!!), Sulu's promotion to Excelsior, Kirk not knowing he ever had a son, Marla McGivers referenced directly by name, etc. Sounds like a treasure trove! The listing for it is at the link. Apparently anyone can watch it on site but they won't let it leave the building. https://cinema.library.ucla.edu/vwebv/holdingsInfo?bibId=117617 Harvey TWH posted:Re: Raiders Correct, never in the film. In fact the DVD I have even still refers to it as "Raiders of the Lost Ark" on the back of the box, it's truly just a labeling thing. Speaking of which, they just recently reissued the movie on a standalone bluray, and it's really striking to see a package with the original "Raiders" logo on it, it hadn't hit me how long it's been. SidneyIsTheKiller fucked around with this message at 08:23 on Jul 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 08:13
|
|
|
I wasn’t sure what studio made Star Trek IV but I’m pretty sure it’s Paramount. Okay here’s my own white whale: as a child I had a beautiful illustrated mythology book that I lost or gave away stupidly at some point. This was in Canada in the mid-90s, and I remember it being a hardcover book in a larger format. It was a collection of various mythological tales: the two I remember were Beowulf and St. George and the Dragon. Thanks in advance if anyone has any ideas!
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 08:58
|
|
|
A webcomic that shows a baseball/softball/t-ball game where it gets progressively more dumb and absurd Art style being similar to Perry Bible fellowship The final panel being a guy hitting a team run and the announcer calling "That's a beeeeedlebayyy baaallll"
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 09:33
|
|
|
I. M. Gei posted:There is a photoshop of George from Seinfeld holding Soul Edge while making this face Are you sure it wasn't the Moonlight Sword from Bloodborne/Dark Souls/Demon's Souls/Armored Core/King's Field/Probably other games I'm missing. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 13:41
|
|
|
Saint Freak posted:Are you sure it wasn't the Moonlight Sword from Bloodborne/Dark Souls/Demon's Souls/Armored Core/King's Field/Probably other games I'm missing. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 14:42
|
|
|
https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1316563-costanzajpg-george-costanza-reaction-face
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 14:53
|
|
|
Imgur isn't letting me upload poo poo but I think that's what he's talking about
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 14:56
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:Imgur isn't letting me upload poo poo but I think that's what he's talking about uploaded it for you. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 14:59
|
|
|
kupachek posted:uploaded it for you. That’s the one! Thank you! Now I gotta find a mod to help me buy it cuz I plan to fill the text field with gang tags and the character limit doesn’t give me enough room to add those plus two 180x180 blocks of this. EDIT: Actually if any of y’all have any other av text ideas I’d love to hear ‘em! I don’t watch enough Seinfeld to be able to come up with anything that goes with this image. I. M. Gei fucked around with this message at 05:07 on Jul 24, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2021 04:35
|
|
|
I. M. Gei posted:That’s the one! Thank you! Milo and POTUS is the solver of that one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2021 06:06
|
|
|
George doesn't look very upset in that picture so I don't think that one would work
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2021 10:42
|
|
|
kupachek posted:Milo and POTUS is the solver of that one. oh yeah, thanks Milo and POTUS
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2021 22:09
|
|
|
A PC game, maybe Amstrad port, late 80s early 90s, where your life was depicted as red vertical bars at the top or maybe bottom of the screen. You lost bars if one of the bouncing/looping bad items touched you, you could win bars back if you picked other items (a cooked chicken?) I think you had to pick up letters while navigating a maze. Also have a very vague notion of it being set on space? At least the crude items/maze tiles looked alien to me. Been looking for it for over 2 decades now it is driving me crazy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2021 22:38
|
|
|
There was a UK radio show that i listened to as a podcast where, I think, the concept was that people brought in new inventions and lobbied for them to be included in a museum or collection of some kind. It was a comedy show, to be clear, with a very dry sense of humor One dude brought in the concept of revising how we think of opposites, and had some outlandish examples i can't think of, but also had examples of things that are the opposite of themselves, like stairs (since they can bring you both up and down) which I think he called "prime opposites". It was very funny and i thought googling prime opposites would make it easy to find but no dice
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2021 23:24
|
|
|
Riptor posted:There was a UK radio show that i listened to as a podcast where, I think, the concept was that people brought in new inventions and lobbied for them to be included in a museum or collection of some kind. It was a comedy show, to be clear, with a very dry sense of humor Radio 4's Museum of Curiosity? E: Sounds a very Radio 4 thing, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2021 23:31
|
|
|
I. M. Gei posted:oh yeah, thanks Milo and POTUS drat it looks good too
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2021 00:21
|
|
Okay I have kind of a tricky request. A family member of mine sent me this photo (cropped to remove people) and they are wondering if it is possible to figure out what the book on the table is. Time-wise the pic was taken around 1989 and is "probably sci-fi" White text on a dark cover, white back with 5 weird column things? not sure thats remotely enough to go on. Seems like a longshot what with 'picture of a polaroid' quality but I figure if any hivemind is going to pluck this from the ether it is goons.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2021 02:04
|
|
|
Ramc posted:Okay I have kind of a tricky request. A family member of mine sent me this photo (cropped to remove people) and they are wondering if it is possible to figure out what the book on the table is. Time-wise the pic was taken around 1989 and is "probably sci-fi" any info on the location of the photo? US? Canada? UK? AUS? e: The edges of the pages are already acid-yellowed, hmm spookykid fucked around with this message at 04:47 on Jul 25, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2021 04:43
|
|
|
Some quote I think attributed to Dr Who a show I've never watched. Went on and on in the sense of a rhyming poem about different types of people, some giving more and others taking more than they got. I can't remember it all, it's years old. Hell I might not even be right about it being dr who. I could see it being a quote of some otherwise moderately accomplished poet from years before.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2021 04:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 01:45 |
|
|
Not even that long ago - about 4 or so years ago - there was a gif or video that I think was Spanish. Maybe Portuguese. Either way, it featured a man dressed up as a piece of poo poo laying in a toilet bowl. Another person comes into the bathroom and sees the "poo poo," and the "poo poo" flies out of the bowl into the person's mouth. I've searched so hard for this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2021 05:08
|
|
