ALL SCI-FI Forum Index ALL SCI-FI
The place to “find your people”.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

1984 (1956 England)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ALL SCI-FI Forum Index -> Sci-Fi Movies and Serials from 1950 to 1969
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
alltare
Quantum Engineer


Joined: 17 Jul 2015
Posts: 351

PostPosted: Sun Aug 14, 2016 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bud Brewster wrote:
alltare wrote:
The Amazon disc has distortion at the bottom of the screen, like VHS "tearing". It's there from beginning to end and is often very distracting. The image is somewhat sharper and has better contrast than the Youtube version.

That bending at the bottom might be fixed by changing a setting on your TV. With my TV there are settings which are labeled 4:3, 16:9, "set by program", zoom 1, zoom 2, and one you might also have, called "just scan".

Just Scan causes the TV to show ever square centimeter of the available image — normally a good thing — but if you change it to "set by program" it will cut off a little on all four sides, thus hiding part of that distracting distortion along the bottom

Give it a try. Very Happy

Bud

That's a good suggestion that should work, but it doesn't seem to be what was done with the Youtube video. The Youtube movie is not just a cropped version of the Amazon DVD- there is nothing cut off of the bottom, top or sides. The picture sizes and content are the same, but one has a lot of tearing and the other one has very little. However, at some time in the past, the two versions did have a common ancestor.

I still have hope that COMET or GET TV will air a better quality image of this movie. GET continues to show a poster of the movie in one of its commercials, implying that it may be coming. And COMET has been showing quite a few relatively obscure titles.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17019
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Mon Aug 15, 2016 9:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

I think you might have misunderstood what I meant.

What I was referring to actually has nothing to do with the proper aspect ratio of the movie being watched, or whether a 4:3 version of the movie has been cropped from a widescreen version.

The "just scan" setting eliminates the "overscan" that TV's routinely do to hide any ragged edges or video flaws in the broadcast image. And in the early days of television, the broadcast images weren't always centered well, so overscan prevented the viewer from seeing a black border on the left, right, top, or bottom.

Switching a TV from "just scan" to another setting that does zoom the picture in just a little (hiding all four outer edges of the picture) is just a way of covering up something at the bottom, like the bending caused by videotape "edge damage", which is distracting to the viewer.

Edge damage is what happens to tapes because of the stress the tape guides place on the edges during playback, rewind, and fast forward. The wrinkled tape along the edge doesn't make good contact with the spinning tape head, and the picture on the screen is affected by this.

And boy-oh-boy, am I showing my age by knowing all this or what? Rolling Eyes

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sat Jan 08, 2022 5:44 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
alltare
Quantum Engineer


Joined: 17 Jul 2015
Posts: 351

PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2016 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bud-

I understand exactly what you meant, and I agreed with you. I was comparing the two versions of the movie, not arguing about whether zooming would fix the DVD's tearing problem (As I said, that would work to some extent, at the expense of lost edge content).

I didn't say anything about aspect ratio — I was referring to all-around cropping because of the use of the Zoom feature (or the non-use of the Just Scan feature). As you have said, the zoom function effectively crops the picture as it appears on your TV screen, and you can't see the top and bottom edges, so the tearing might not be visible if the picture is zoomed. Overscanning kinda does the same thing. However, that is not what happened to the Youtube video. It has exactly the same picture content as the DVD. Both pictures are exactly the same EXCEPT things at the bottom of the DVD have tearing distortion, while those same things on the Youtube video do not. The Youtube video is not a zoomed-in-some-way version version of the DVD. It is copied from a different source. That's all I'm saying.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17019
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 1:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

Ah-ha. I got it now. Thanks. Very Happy

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17019
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Thu Aug 03, 2017 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

alltare wrote:
Every high school kid should be required to read or watch "1984".

I actually thought the '56 version (the version with Edmund Obrien) was better. That version's set design is not great, but it's the story that really counts.

It's hard to evaluate the quality of the sets in this movie, because it's definitely not supposed to present a bright world with futuristic architecture. Most of the exteriors are just shots of London in 1956.

So the dreary-and-unimaginative look is, I think, deliberate.

But the rubber doors we see in several scenes . . . that didn't seem like a very good idea at all. Rubber doors? Uh . . . no.

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sat Jan 08, 2022 5:46 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17019
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2018 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

alltare wrote:
I guess I was wrong about deleted scenes in the Amazon DVD — I thought the rat torture had originally been longer and more graphic than what's seen (I believe it was also more graphic in the remake), but if IMDB says 1:30 is the time, then I was wrong because the disc is 1:30:15 in length, just like the Youtube version.).

That rat torture idea is disturbing every time I think about it. I doubt there's a person on the planet who wouldn't start screaming in the first fifteen seconds if their head was locked inside a small cage with rats just a few inches away!

Back around 1985 I went out to the small shed in my backyard to put some dry dog food into the bowls for my two dogs. It was about 10:00 at night, and I held a flashlight as I reached for the large bag of dog food. But I noticed a six-inch round hole in the bag near the bottom. I heard a soft noise to my right, and I swung the flashlight towards the work bench built against the wall, a few feet away.

There, in the light of the flashlight, were three large rats scrambling across the bench, weaving around the miscellaneous junk in an almost snake-like way.

I'm not easily frightened . . . but standing in the dark and suddenly seeing those large rats slithering quickly towards me across the old wooden bench scared the crap out of me! I literally ran out of the shed, across the yard, into my house! Shocked

The rats had gnawed a hole in the dog food bag, and they had been crawling into the bag and eating the dog food. Obviously I moved the bag of dog food into the house the next day . . .

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sat Jan 08, 2022 5:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17019
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2020 10:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

IMDB has 17 trivia items for this movie/series. Here’s a few of the ones I found the most interesting, in the blue text. Very Happy
________________________________

~ During filming, Jan Sterling (Julia of the Outer Party) was pregnant with her son Adams Douglas, so she was given a certificate by the crew proclaiming him to be an honorary member of the cast.

Note from me: I've never heard of anyone with the first name Adams. I wonder if that's a typo. Confused

~ The character played by Sir Michael Redgrave is called "O'Brien" in the original novel, but, as Edmond O'Brien was cast as Winston Smith, the name was changed to "O'Connor" for this movie.

Note from me: I'm not clear on why the filmmakers felt that a character named O'Brien needed to be changed to O'Connor just because a character named Winston Smith was played by an actor named O'Brien. (What am I missing here, folks? Confused)

~ Sonia Orwell, widow of George Orwell, objected to the changed ending, and had this movie withdrawn from circulation.

Note from me: Wow, that's amazing. I found out that she withdrew the rights after the original copyright expired.

I wasted about twenty minutes trying to find out what change in the ending had outraged Ms. Orwell, but I struck out. Then I found the answer in another IMDB trivia item which was further down the list. Rolling Eyes

~ Passed by the British Board of Film Censors with an "X" certificate on November 10, 1955 and then premiered at the Warner Theatre, Leicester Square, on March 1, 1956 running disappointingly for only two weeks.

Interestingly, this was the first of two versions that Director Michael Anderson shot, each with an entirely different ending.

The Monthly Film Bulletin reviewed the London premiere and noted that the "changed ending" shows Winston Smith shouting "Down with Big Brother", whereupon he is promptly shot by the police. Julia is shot down as she approaches his dead body.

In the American version (released on DVD by Orbit Media and taken from a television print from Screen Gems), Smith does exactly the opposite and ends up shouting "Long Live Big Brother," but Julia is nowhere to be seen.

Comparing the two versions, the latter was closer to Orwell's original, while the original British ending was damned by The Times as an "unforgivable mistake".


Note from me: Ah-ha. No wonder Sonia was pissed. The book has Winston and Julia meeting each other after they've been tortured, and they both confess they no longer feel love. Winston then sees a poster and chants, "I love Big Brother."

Quite a difference . . . Sad

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pow
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 27 Sep 2014
Posts: 3400
Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2022 11:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Author Bill Warren's review.

For several reasons, 1984 can be considered a property that would have best been left unfilmed. The characters are ciphers — Winston & Julia exist solely to demonstrate the total power of the state over the individual, and have almost no personalities otherwise; this is inextricably part of the story. Furthermore, if done faithfully, the storyline is so depressing as to indicate there is no hope for anyone once the state achieves the kind of power it has in 1984.

Nonetheless, 1984 was filmed, and although as a movie it's not too bad, several errors were made that make it look as though it was carved from gray soap, and to be mostly undramatic, even dull.

The problems with 1984 are more basic than whether the ending is followed accurately or not. In an effort to avoid being lumped in with all the other SF films of the period, the technological trappings have been depleted, including oddly enough, the two-way television screens.

In the book, these are unbreakable TV sets embedded in the wall of rooms; the sets are perpetually on, and their built-in cameras can see everything in the room, while state-controlled programs direct the actions of party members.

You never know when a set is watching you; all you know is that it sometimes is.

In the film, the television pictures don't exist; what remains is a flickering semi-sphere set in the wall, which is always watching.

While this probably seemed more frightening to the filmmakers, it is actually less ominous; the idea that you are always watched can be gotten used to even if it's dispiriting. The idea that you never know when you are being watched is nerve-wracking, and wracking nerves is what the state in 1984 is best at.

"Anything that smacks even faintly of the fantastic or science fiction has been resolutely shunned," the N.Y. Times review stated.

This, no doubt, was to prevent 1984 from being counted as just another routine SF movie.

But the makers of 1984 outsmarted themselves.

In a laudable attempt to render Orwell's future world as visually drab & bleak, art director Terence Verity adopted a flat, gray look, which cinematographer C. Penington Richards rendered effectively.

But low-budget SF films had, mostly for budgetary reasons, also begun to use an identical look.

There can be little doubt that the visual style of 1984 was deliberate; the interiors have quite another feel to them, and the model work and matte paintings are elaborate enough to show that this was not a cheap film. But it certainly looks like one.

Edmond O'Brien struggles to make himself into Winston Smith, but the struggle shows and he is not believable in the part.

Michael Redgrave's smooth, polished performance as O'Connor (O'Brien in the novel) is the best in the film.

Director Michael Anderson, who is never better than routine, is in his usual rut there.
The scenes are largely flaccid, and only rarely does anything seem important, even to the director.

The film has no drive or energy, no conviction. The ideas elude Anderson, and he directs only the surface. The love scenes are flat, but to Anderson's and the actors credit, they do convey a sense of fatalism: we are well aware that neither character expects this to last. They are grabbing what small touches of happiness they can before the walls close in.

Anderson does manage to make the Two Minute Hate sequence exciting and frightening, with a sense of urgency.

It's too bad that the rest of the film couldn't have had the energy of these few moments.

The rest of the cast fit their roles better than O'Brien. Donald Pleasence as Winston's treacherous neighbor is at his wormy best, and is effective here.

David Kossof's shop owner is also good.

Jan Sterling seems mousy and frightened, even when happy.

Even had it been adapted & filmed much more interestingly, 1984 could never really succeed in any other other medium than print. The story, however, is not easily translated to acting media. The central material to Orwell's book present great difficulty in depiction. You can show the effect of the ideas, but the ideas themselves are elusive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17019
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2022 2:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

Thanks for sharing Bill Warren's review with us, Mike. He certainly doesn't misrepresent this movie.

I agree with Bill, and not just because I'm the eternal optomist who wants uplifting stories, likable characters, and happy endings. I still kinda wish James Cameron had allowed the Titanic to miss the iceberg (and let The Love Boat hit it instead.) Laughing

However, I must admit that the way things are going in today's society, we certainly need a cautionary tale about how corrupt and powerful The Government can get, and how clueless and easily deceived the public has become.

It seems like the Republicans want us the believe that January 6th was just a Comic Con that got a bit rowdy!



___________________
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pow
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 27 Sep 2014
Posts: 3400
Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2022 4:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nah, January 6 of last year was just a bunch of high-spirited tourists taking in the Capitol, Bud.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17019
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2022 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pow wrote:
Nah, January 6 of last year was just a bunch of high-spirited tourists taking in the Capitol, Bud.

Unfortunately, what's actually being "takin' in" are the American people who believe the bullshit being fed to them by the FOX Propaganda Network and the politicians who would sell their souls (and ours) to keep their jobs in Washington. Sad
_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pow
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 27 Sep 2014
Posts: 3400
Location: New York

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2022 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would dearly love to have both George Carlin and Gore Vidal here with us to hear what their take is on all of this bloody mess.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pow
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 27 Sep 2014
Posts: 3400
Location: New York

PostPosted: Sat Jan 08, 2022 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey, "Let no truth go unaltered or changed" could be the new motto for Fox News. It's as hilarious as their fair & balanced motto that they use.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bud Brewster
Galactic Fleet Admiral (site admin)


Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 17019
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2022 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

________________________________

Guys, I'm not actually naive enough to believe that any news agency is totally unbiased and truthful. Rolling Eyes

But I've watched CNN, MSNBC, HLN, and the FOX (so-called) News Network enough to realize that there's a huge difference between the networks who desperately want the American public to stop believing the lies told by the Republican party and the Donald Trump groupies — compared to the ones who spout outrageous bullshit to us on a daily bases. Sad

The FOX Propaganda Network has convinced many gullible people that they shouldn't trust the medical community who pleads with us to wear the mask and get the vaccinations so we can rid the world of this vicious virus!

I'm appalled by fact that there are so many people who've swallowed the bald-face crap from Trump and his brainwashed supporters concerning the need to follow the advice of the CDC and help the world stop this damn pandemic! Sad

This thread contains an intelligent discussion on how George Orwell's science fiction novel described the chilling possibility that the government might become so powerful that it could brainwash the population into believing outrageous falsehoods!

The whole idea has seemed a bit far fetched . . . until recently.

Now America has seen shocking videos of a savage mob which stormed the nations Capitol, trashed the building, threatened to hang our politicians on a wooden scaffolding they built on the site, and seriously injuring police officers who risked their lives to protect the people in the Capitol!

And yet the Republican party, the FOX News Network, and the crazed supporters of Donald Trump are still desperately trying convince America that this attack on our democracy was somehow justified, and that the recent election of President Biden was fragulent — despite no proof whatsoever that any of this is true!

Folks, George Orwell's novel is no longer fiction.

It has become a prophecy concerning our political landscape in America, right here in the 21st century. We are being assaulted by the efforts of unprincipled individuals who want to take advantage of the nation's gullible segment of our population, the people who can be mislead by lies and propaganda.

I wish I knew how we could solve this problem and return America to her former glory — but I'm afraid that won't be possible unless those of use who recognize the threat can find a way to legally and peacefully fight back.

_________________
____________
Is there no man on Earth who has the wisdom and innocence of a child?
~ The Space Children (1958)


Last edited by Bud Brewster on Sun Aug 14, 2022 12:35 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pow
Galactic Ambassador


Joined: 27 Sep 2014
Posts: 3400
Location: New York

PostPosted: Sun Jan 09, 2022 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

"The opposite of truth isn't lies. The opposite of truth is the illusion of truth." Stephen Hawking.

The GOP response, as well as their voters, to the January 6 terrorist attack on the Capitol is shameful & disgusting.

One police officer has died from a stroke due to the horrific stress of that disgusting assault. Four have committed suicide.

Only Liz Chaney & her father showed up for an event to commemorate these dedicated and brave officers, as well as the ones who risked their lives protecting members of both parties that day.

The Republicans should be ashamed of themselves over this but we know they're not. It should let their voters know just how low the GOP is and that they respect no one in their quest for power.

This is not a party that has anyone's interest but their own. They don't have your back, they don't give a shit about anyone else.

For my money I think that PBS News Hour has the finest coverage of news. They devote plenty of time to covering a story that ABC, CBS, & NBC national news refuses to do. Those networks somehow believe that complex stories can be covered in a few minutes.

They cram so many news stories into a half-hour — some of them absolutely unnecessary — that have no time to give anything any depth. Which is their goal.

They are all about short attention span and that's what they want. An informed public is too dangerous to the powers-that-be that own the networks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    ALL SCI-FI Forum Index -> Sci-Fi Movies and Serials from 1950 to 1969 All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group