XPost: rec.arts.movies.past-films   
   From: YourName@YourISP.com   
      
   On 2018-05-21 00:51:38 +0000, J. Clarke said:   
      
   > On Sun, 20 May 2018 18:13:31 -0500, super70s   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   >> Some relevant passages from a EW piece:   
   >>   
   >> "Christopher Nolan may be the only working director qualified to   
   >> reexamine Stanley Kubrick's 1968 sci-fi masterpice, which Nolan has   
   >> carefully 'unrestored' to its original photo format for an extraordinary   
   >> theatrical rerelease unlike any other 50th anniversary."   
   >>   
   >> "EW: For someone who's never seen this film, why should they make a   
   >> point to see it in this special format?"   
   >> "CN: ...What we're doing is putting it out there in its original 70mm   
   >> photochemical analog glory to give audiences in 2018 the same   
   >> experiences that audiences had in 1968."   
   >>   
   >> "EW: Which scenes most benefit from 'unrestoration'?"   
   >> "CN: The entire film is so much more heightened, the color particularly.   
   >> There are things that appear to you in a revelatory way."   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> I'm not exactly getting the point of this, they go to so much trouble to   
   >> restore iconic films like this one, Gone With the Wind, The Wizard of   
   >> Oz, etc., in digital format and I thought the whole point of that was   
   >> for "heightened color" and a sharper picture (which you often see   
   >> demonstrated in a split screen comparison).   
   >>   
   >> I only have the original MGM/WB DVD release so I guess I'm stuck with   
   >> the "inferior restored" version, lol.   
   >   
   > In this case the point is that Nolan, having bungled his own attempt   
   > at epic science fiction, now wants to piss all over Kubrick's.   
      
   It would be extremely difficult to make "2001" any worse!  :-\   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)