AMPmusicals 08.05.2019 06:29 |
I was at the Nebraska Grand Comic Con V2 on March 22nd, and they had a free theatrical showing of Flash Gordon. I had not seen it since I was a kid, and it looked stupendous! You could literally see sweat on actors, and every sequin and bead and even stitching in costumes. I couldn't recall ever having seen a movie so clear. I mentioned that to the theater owner, and he said, "Oh, we forgot to announce, this was the world premiere of the 4K print. The studio just finished the 4K restoration this week, and we're the first to show it!" So, Flash Gordon is coming to 4K soon, and it looks (and sounds) incredible! |
sahm 08.05.2019 06:37 |
Do You Mean "Gordons Alive" |
dysan 08.05.2019 08:20 |
Did they sort out the see-through Hawkmen during the composite shots? |
The Fairy King 08.05.2019 09:15 |
Klytus i'm boooooooored. |
AudioSynthesis 08.05.2019 09:55 |
Oh wow! I know that sometimes 4K releases come with DolbyAtmos mixes, so let's hope that we hear that music like we've never heard it before! Maybe even an Isolated Score Track - that would be spectacular. |
matt z 08.05.2019 13:43 |
dysan wrote: Did they sort out the see-through Hawkmen during the composite shots?FORGET THAT, are there any see through shots of Ornella Muti?!!! Blu-ray DVD extra shower scenes??? ;-) Yeah i know what u mean though. Very unlikely, they'd have to either digitally animate/enhance or have the pre process original shots and that's VERY unlikely to have been done But GEEZ, *MARCH 22ND!!** and we're BARELY GETTING THIS INFORMATION NOW???? I've seen it screened several times, I'm certain you saw something better and crisper than any audience had seen yet. That's how i felt seeing THRILLER 3-D which may not get a proper release thanks to these conniving people doing their lawsuit/smear campaign |
dysan 08.05.2019 14:20 |
I once wrote to Ornella Muti and asked her if she was wearing knickers in the first scene she appears. She confirmed she wasn't (it was pretty obvious). So I then wrote to the guy who published 'Bare Facts' (a pre internet compendium of nude scenes) and told him. He was very excited. Good days man. Good days. |
Holly2003 08.05.2019 14:28 |
I remember a review of the film in, I think, 2000AD that said Ornella Muti was particularly striking when walking away from the camera. Even back then, I thought that was a bit risque for a comic aimed at 9-15 year olds. Although they were right ;) |
matt z 08.05.2019 15:03 |
dysan wrote: I once wrote to Ornella Muti and asked her if she was wearing knickers in the first scene she appears. She confirmed she wasn't (it was pretty obvious). So I then wrote to the guy who published 'Bare Facts' (a pre internet compendium of nude scenes) and told him. He was very excited. Good days man. Good days.Whoa. I'm amazed that you got through to her. A fan mail site or was this some tricky way through management? That's an hilarious story though! She actually was cool with that. Hahaha. I know she bares all in a bunch of other flicks but yeah she's striking in that era |
dysan 08.05.2019 17:24 |
In Flash you can actually see her .. um... muff. How it missed the censors I'll never know. |
mooghead 08.05.2019 19:03 |
Is it a proper 80's Afro muff? |
The Fairy King 08.05.2019 20:10 |
matt z wrote: That's how i felt seeing THRILLER 3-D which may not get a proper release thanks to these conniving people doing their lawsuit/smear campaignI hope you're "joking". dysan wrote: In Flash you can actually see her .. um... muff. How it missed the censors I'll never know.This comment means nothing without a timestamp... |
matt z 09.05.2019 02:08 |
Nah, wasn't joking. To be a guy that fucking busy who's itinerary reflects being elsewhere most of the fucking time, being chased after death by a student prodigy who lost the bid and contract on the "Michael Jackson : One" residency and therefore some huge money, turning around and attempting to sell a story (*people STILL pay heavily for anything bad about mjj) to outlets and publishers because he's BURNED BRIDGES IN HIS INDUSTRY (*fucking the talent/artist's gf etc) all screams of desperation. The story presented in the "documentary" doesn't stand scrutiny. Read about it. It's all developed around a book published in the early 90's. The ages and timeframes don't bear scrutiny and even the fucking train station mentioned in the film didn't exist at the time until the alleged victims were over the age indicated in the film. They're out for money and have debt. Michael had enemies taking on the Beatles and breaking records and being black and within the circles of that industry. I know the image he presented to the public was something fictitious and deliberately bizarre to retain the whole illusion and cheesy David Copperfieldism of it. His voice wasn't like that. anyways. I'm amidst weird people on a subway. Good evening and goodnight y'all. We'll all know sooner or later and if I'm wrong I'll eat my words I'm looking forward to seeing FLASH again in HD that sounds awesome |
The Fairy King 09.05.2019 13:34 |
matt z wrote: Nah, wasn't joking. To be a guy that fucking busy who's itinerary reflects being elsewhere most of the fucking time, being chased after death by a student prodigy who lost the bid and contract on the "Michael Jackson : One" residency and therefore some huge money, turning around and attempting to sell a story (*people STILL pay heavily for anything bad about mjj) to outlets and publishers because he's BURNED BRIDGES IN HIS INDUSTRY (*fucking the talent/artist's gf etc) all screams of desperation. The story presented in the "documentary" doesn't stand scrutiny. Read about it. It's all developed around a book published in the early 90's. The ages and timeframes don't bear scrutiny and even the fucking train station mentioned in the film didn't exist at the time until the alleged victims were over the age indicated in the film. They're out for money and have debt. Michael had enemies taking on the Beatles and breaking records and being black and within the circles of that industry. I know the image he presented to the public was something fictitious and deliberately bizarre to retain the whole illusion and cheesy David Copperfieldism of it. His voice wasn't like that. anyways. I'm amidst weird people on a subway. Good evening and goodnight y'all. We'll all know sooner or later and if I'm wrong I'll eat my words I'm looking forward to seeing FLASH again in HD that sounds awesomeYou sound like a stan and use the same "defence". Disappointing. I don't think it's debatable anymore. MJ was a serial child molester. That said, i'm also looking forward to seeing Flash Gordon in 4K. |
matt z 09.05.2019 15:11 |
What's a stan? Pakistan? Nah. The guy had been arrested and searched and gone on trial. And then acquitted by the same defense of these guys. People mj associated with Brett Barnes, Lennon's kid etc have all stated that although he was weird he was not that kind of dude. The information is out there, however if he were proven a serial molester then I'd be right there with u on it. But that has yet to happen, even with the DA Tom Sneddon abusing chain of custody protections for evidentiary procedures. It's law vs contrivance and the way these guys are currently changing their stories AND all the inconsistencies presented as "fact" (including robson's wife claiming she had no idea how to deal with his "breakdown" (see UNEMPLOYMENT; in fighting and potential divorce) don't help their case at all. They act as people with something to hide. The "charitable" group they had INITIALLY stated that robesons wife was a previous victim of abuse. Within the week the alleged "documentary" aired, all that information was altered in their website and charitable org (one in which earnings can't be scrutinized) changed to reflect the STORY presented as "fact" in the alleged "documentary" I.e. she's no longer a victim of abuse because that would be inconsistent with the story they presented in the film, among the other things. I don't want to change this into a mjj discussion and derail it like so many other threads are being derailed. But the information and sources are out there as is testimony in trial and via depositions. Not my responsibility if people are lazy and want to do any research on something that's involving a music icon and a lawsuit of 1.5 BILLION dollars Objectivity is out the window sometimes. I watched the films. And like most things i weighted the sides. If it comes out that any of those things were credible and not just encouraging words (the faxes, videos etc were sent to dozens of people throughout that guys life for encouragement, he visited and donated to victims, ECU ward patients, burn victims, veterans etc and didn't put it out on blast all the time) If it comes out that he WAS that kind of dude and not simply portraying a role and JW doctrine then I'll say the dude was a monster. But until then, I'll rely on what dude stood for, the good he'd done and what can be proven. That's about it. Won't burden this FLASH thread with MJJ recourse anymore. |
The Fairy King 09.05.2019 18:01 |
I respect you on here and it really pains me to go into it, but here goes.
matt z wrote: What's a stan?Quick Google search 'stan meaning' and you get: stan /stan/ INFORMAL noun 1. an overzealous or obsessive fan of a particular celebrity. "he has millions of stans who are obsessed with him and call him a rap god" verb 1. be an overzealous or obsessive fan of a particular celebrity. "y'all know I stan for Katy Perry, so I was excited to see the artwork for her upcoming album" It comes from the song "Stan" by Eminem, about one of his obsessive fans. Pakistan?C'mooooon! :D Nah. The guy had been arrested and searched and gone on trial. And then acquitted by the same defense of these guys. People mj associated with Brett Barnes, Lennon's kid etc have all stated that although he was weird he was not that kind of dude.O.J. was acquitted, but i'm sure we all agree he was guilty AF. ;) Getting acquitted on a technicality, like the absence of any hard evidence isn't rare. Child abuse is especially notorious for being hard to prove in court. Kids that hung out with MJ and who weren't molested, were usually famous kids he was smart enough to not touch. It was always some kid that came from 'troubled', 'sick' or/and 'poor' families. The information is out there, however if he were proven a serial molester then I'd be right there with u on it. But that has yet to happen, even with the DA Tom Sneddon abusing chain of custody protections for evidentiary procedures.The Jordan Chandler penis drawing should have been proof enough. The testimonials from (now) 5 kids, staff and parents/family isn't enough? It's law vs contrivance and the way these guys are currently changing their stories AND all the inconsistencies presented as "fact" (including robson's wife claiming she had no idea how to deal with his "breakdown" (see UNEMPLOYMENT; in fighting and potential divorce) don't help their case at all. They act as people with something to hide.Where are they changing their stories? They have been consistent, unlike some of the members of the Jackson family. Who are only attacking Wade for cheating on what's-her-face-Jackson with whom Wade had a relationship with ages ago. Nothing that has been brought to the table to prove MJ didn't systematically abuse kids, really. Just a smear campaign to discredit these guys. I mean REALLY low stuff, even going after their families/kids. Pretty much is a testament how desperate people are to protect the goose that is laying the golden eggs. You are pointing out the same 'facts' to discredit Wade with some (i'm sorry to say) lame attempts to no avail i'm afraid. Do you think that this is easy on any relationship? Whatever happens between people doesn't mean it proves or disproves offences that happened to these boys. The "charitable" group they had INITIALLY stated that robesons wife was a previous victim of abuse.It's Robson by the way. Easy going after Wade isn't it, as he is the most high profile of the bunch. You have nothing on Safechuck? ;) Where is the empathy? Who are you trying to protect? Within the week the alleged "documentary" aired, all that information was altered in their website and charitable org (one in which earnings can't be scrutinized) changed to reflect the STORY presented as "fact" in the alleged "documentary" I.e. she's no longer a victim of abuse because that would be inconsistent with the story they presented in the film, among the other things. I don't want to change this into a mjj discussion and derail it like so many other threads are being derailed. But the information and sources are out there as is testimony in trial and via depositions. Not my responsibility if people are lazy and want to do any research on something that's involving a music icon and a lawsuit of 1.5 BILLION dollars Objectivity is out the window sometimes. I watched the films. And like most things i weighted the sides. If it comes out that any of those things were credible and not just encouraging words (the faxes, videos etc were sent to dozens of people throughout that guys life for encouragement, he visited and donated to victims, ECU ward patients, burn victims, veterans etc and didn't put it out on blast all the time) If it comes out that he WAS that kind of dude and not simply portraying a role and JW doctrine then I'll say the dude was a monster. But until then, I'll rely on what dude stood for, the good he'd done and what can be proven. That's about it. Won't burden this FLASH thread with MJJ recourse anymore.Ah, the 'research' card. I wondered when it would come up and there it is. People that debunk the stuff 'you' people come up with clearly didn't do their 'research'? But seriously, the thing is though, when you have pre-conceived ideas and you really don't want to believe this (even subconsciously) then the chanced are that you will find a lot of "evidence" that this must be all an elaborate scheme to get money. I have been an MJ fan for most of my life, pre-dating Queen and have a pretty extensive MJ collection. When the Jordon Chandler allegations were all over the news it went by me (i was pretty young still) and of course i did hear about it, but it didn't phase me. MJ was God. The second set of allegations after the Martin Bashir documentary was the tipping point, but i was relieved he was acquitted. Now i could bury my head in the sand again and still listen to his stuff. The person MJ was by now clearly a troubled human being yes, but a paedophile? Nah. After reading a lot of books (pre-dating this DOCUMENTARY) on the man, seeing documentaries and looking into the court documents i just can't deny this shit anymore. As much as it hurts for me to admit. Now what happens? Do i still listen to his music? Yes, but not everything. :D Also: Going on a rant and then quickly closing the door in my face by not wanting to engage and going offtopic is kind of a dick move. You could've replied in the MJ thread under Personal and just simply link to it in that thread. Make it clickable though, otherwise Moog. ;) |
Dr Magus 10.05.2019 09:42 |
There is a classic italian film from the early 70's where a teenage Ornella Muti shags her dad! Marvellous! |
bucsateflon 10.05.2019 10:12 |
The Fairy King wrote: I have been an MJ fan for most of my life, pre-dating Queen and have a pretty extensive MJ collection. When the Jordon Chandler allegations were all over the news it went by me (i was pretty young still) and of course i did hear about it, but it didn't phase me. MJ was God.MJ and Queen are not compatible in anyway shape or form. |
dudeofqueen 10.05.2019 11:05 |
ONLY reason for this coming out is that the restoration guy must have wanted Ornella Muti on a huge screen for 5 minutes....... |
dysan 10.05.2019 11:07 |
"MJ and Queen are not compatible in anyway shape or form." I'm not a fan of MJ but know that in the scheme of things, they are EXACTLY the same. |
dysan 10.05.2019 11:08 |
(apart from the obvious of course) |
bucsateflon 10.05.2019 11:14 |
so is Katy Perry... exactly the same, now I understand |
dysan 10.05.2019 12:38 |
No this is incorrect. |
brians wig 10.05.2019 15:00 |
Bringing this BACK on Topic.... I hope to God it's not Studio Canal releasing this on 4K, otherwise I can't see the audio being any different from how shit it's always sounded. |
dysan 10.05.2019 15:07 |
I'd be surprised if the film company have the raw tracks still (these things tend to go walkies) - would be nice to know if BM had a hand in this project to supply some elements back to the movie dudes. |
matt z 11.05.2019 00:41 |
Fair enough Fairy King. Errors in spelling are from using outdated phone Swype. Still doesn't seem credible to me, but if we must, I'll locate said thread sometime when i have time. (Working n fixing home repairs for aging family) and yeah... we'll have the fun of bickering about that dead guy again.... it all sells pretty much everything (*except for Joe Jackson's cologne). Frankly pretty tired of talking about the dude. Same thing i told my co-worker. But if we must we shall. Until then, I'm dragging myself back to the family house to spend two days of dreary watching people play video games. As for FLASH GORDON. ...OP, *DID YOU NOTICE ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE AUDIO? it HAS always been really murky and could use a newly integrated and 8.1, 5.1 whichever SCORE. I'd always thought it was just my 5 copies of the film (different international releases with alternate artwork, posters etc bought for signings and purchased pretty cheaply) I've never seen the muff in question on that film, but I'll look next time i can. If muff is what you're after track down L'ULTIMA DONNA (banned in many places) and LA RAGAZZA DI TRIESTE, both of which feature prominent nekkid scenes. The latter features her with a bald skull cap from middle to end, but there's still bod a plenty |
dysan 11.05.2019 08:06 |
00:26:20 |
The Fairy King 12.05.2019 11:36 |
|
bucsateflon 12.05.2019 15:31 |
old shit |
dysan 12.05.2019 15:44 |
Poor old Peter Wyngarde. |
Dr Magus 13.05.2019 10:38 |
Love this film so much. Looking forward to the 4k version. |