Ahhh... Ok. Confused me when he mentioned the Last Wolverine movie.
BTW, have you watched the B&W version of Logan? (aka, the noir version)
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hollywood Blames Rotten Tomatoes for its Rotten Summer
- Thread starter Huntn
- Start date
-
- Tags
- hollywood rotten tomatoes
- Sort by reaction score
BTW, have you watched the B&W version of Logan? (aka, the noir version)
Hum, I was under the impression that up until the late sixties, any intimacy was dialed down way more than your example. Wasn't it more implied they'd slept earlier? Anyway, you are right about PG-13, though.
My mistake.
I will say that in X-Men 2 (PG-13), he was making the same kind of moves sinking is claws into the chests of the bad guys. [doublepost=1505521709][/doublepost](PG-13
Yes, you are right, somewhere in the late 60's, but when I made that statement, I was thinking of how gun fights were portrayed, not so much sex. I've recently seen those underwear clad sex scenes on tv shows.
Oh, yep, you're right. I saw way too many westerns as a kid. Don't recall blood being a major special effects.My mistake.
[doublepost=1505521709][/doublepost](PG-13
Yes, you are right, somewhere in the late 60's, but when I made that statement, I was thinking of how gun fights were portrayed, not so much sex. I've recently seen those underwear clad sex scenes on tv shows.
You should of provided a link! So I had to apply myself and conduct a search.
Outstanding trailer. I think, but might be mistaken is that most of the focus of the rating system is to protect children's eyes from sex although that standard seems to have shifted over the years when it comes to sex in your underwear.
VR And Movies
Disclaimer, VR is not mentioned in the linked article, but imo, it needs to be mentioned in any discussion regarding the future of movie theaters.
Interesting article associated with Blade Runner 2049, about how technology is effecting the movie entertainment industry. I know 3D is the latest tech attempt to boost movie ticket sales. However I don’t find theater 3D to be compelling, and actually it’s distracting and just not good enough to warrant the extra cost. The other issue is that many of the muti-screen theaters use smaller screens, and instead should be using the big screens, even better are the iMax size screen that come close to filling your visual field.
As the owner of an Oculus Rift (Virtual Reality headset) the true excitement associated with VR is when you find yourself first person in a 3D virtual reality. I mean you are there, inside and exploring a 3D space, first person, interacting with objects using your virtual hands. That is a completely incredible experience and amazing and it’s multiplayer capable, but I have yet to do that with anyone. This experience is currently achievable at home with a $1000 PC, plus $500 for the headset (maybe eventually on Macs for a bit more $$. Apple is working on the technology).
I predict 3D/VR won’t be very conducive for a group audience to view a movie, until they can get the audience feeling like they are inside the 3D space. The problem will be the competition from the technology available at Home. I think an iMax size screen would have to be part of the any realistic solution, that gives incentive to go to a theater. It’s either that or individual headsets, but then again, the competition would be your home computer, or even cable companies who will figure out how to deliver this technology to your home.
As the VR technology improves increasing resolution to photo realism, you won't need a 60’ tall screen to wow you. Some of us are already being wowed by a 3x5” LCD screen worn on a headset. I need to see if a movie can be watched in 3D VR via the Oculus Rift or Vive headsets.
Rotten Tomatoes Couldn't Prevent 'Blade Runner 2049's Box Office Disaster
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottm...-couldnt-save-blade-runner-2049/#49ac1deb1c0c
As a sequel to a 35-year old movie heralded for its visuals and its big ideas, Blade Runner 2049 is essentially the same thing, but existing in an environment where visual glory is par for the and big ideas aren’t enough when audiences have endless high quality at-home entertainment options. This isn’t 2002 when audiences flocked to The Time Machine because it was the big movie of the moment and folks just wanted to see a movie. Theatrical has lost that advantage, as folks don’t go to the movies just to go to the movies. They have to want to see a specific feature and want to see it soon enough to justify the theatrical time/expense.
Disclaimer, VR is not mentioned in the linked article, but imo, it needs to be mentioned in any discussion regarding the future of movie theaters.
Interesting article associated with Blade Runner 2049, about how technology is effecting the movie entertainment industry. I know 3D is the latest tech attempt to boost movie ticket sales. However I don’t find theater 3D to be compelling, and actually it’s distracting and just not good enough to warrant the extra cost. The other issue is that many of the muti-screen theaters use smaller screens, and instead should be using the big screens, even better are the iMax size screen that come close to filling your visual field.
As the owner of an Oculus Rift (Virtual Reality headset) the true excitement associated with VR is when you find yourself first person in a 3D virtual reality. I mean you are there, inside and exploring a 3D space, first person, interacting with objects using your virtual hands. That is a completely incredible experience and amazing and it’s multiplayer capable, but I have yet to do that with anyone. This experience is currently achievable at home with a $1000 PC, plus $500 for the headset (maybe eventually on Macs for a bit more $$. Apple is working on the technology).
I predict 3D/VR won’t be very conducive for a group audience to view a movie, until they can get the audience feeling like they are inside the 3D space. The problem will be the competition from the technology available at Home. I think an iMax size screen would have to be part of the any realistic solution, that gives incentive to go to a theater. It’s either that or individual headsets, but then again, the competition would be your home computer, or even cable companies who will figure out how to deliver this technology to your home.
As the VR technology improves increasing resolution to photo realism, you won't need a 60’ tall screen to wow you. Some of us are already being wowed by a 3x5” LCD screen worn on a headset. I need to see if a movie can be watched in 3D VR via the Oculus Rift or Vive headsets.
Rotten Tomatoes Couldn't Prevent 'Blade Runner 2049's Box Office Disaster
https://www.forbes.com/sites/scottm...-couldnt-save-blade-runner-2049/#49ac1deb1c0c
As a sequel to a 35-year old movie heralded for its visuals and its big ideas, Blade Runner 2049 is essentially the same thing, but existing in an environment where visual glory is par for the and big ideas aren’t enough when audiences have endless high quality at-home entertainment options. This isn’t 2002 when audiences flocked to The Time Machine because it was the big movie of the moment and folks just wanted to see a movie. Theatrical has lost that advantage, as folks don’t go to the movies just to go to the movies. They have to want to see a specific feature and want to see it soon enough to justify the theatrical time/expense.
Last edited:
Products assuredly of the future.
i’m probably not the best to judge, but I don’t remember any specifically so I guess I was not bothered by them.I read there's a lot of Sony in it.Products assuredly of the future.
Not to mention there are viable ways to enjoy something that feels like the movie going experience without the expense of seeing individual movies especially on dates or heaven forbid, a family of 4!
60 and 70 “ TVs have dropped a lot in price. They say people don’t go to the movies anymore just to see any movie, but have specific titles, and frankly a large number of recently movies are just not worth seeing. I’ve had better luck with TV cable series.
I still like the movie experience, I just don't like the movie expense, and you're right the amount of decent movies out there is minimal to say the leastNot to mention there are viable ways to enjoy something that feels like the movie going experience without the expense of seeing individual movies especially on dates or heaven forbid, a family of 4!
I prefer the full size screens, but in many of the multiplexes, many of the screens are the smaller version.
Giant corporate logos and prevalent advertising are part of BR's original spirit and look. This is carried over into 2049, and indeed one of the buildings has a giant Sony logo. But I don't feel that it detracted from the movie at all.
Yes, that critique was an exaggeration. There was product placement, but it was cool when the brand was not obvious from its current presence in the market.
I have skipped movies in theaters due to Rotten Tomatoes scores, only to watch it at home and find out I liked the movie and would've enjoyed it in a (much larger) theater screen.
So I give at least partial credence to their assessment.
At this point, I save the theater for high-effects, big blockbuster-type movies where the visuals are a spectacle, or if it's stuff I just can't wait to see (like anything Star Wars related). It's especially wonderful when we get both a great story AND spectacular effects, but those incidences are rare.
Dramas and non-effects-driven movies can wait for the home theater.
So I give at least partial credence to their assessment.
At this point, I save the theater for high-effects, big blockbuster-type movies where the visuals are a spectacle, or if it's stuff I just can't wait to see (like anything Star Wars related). It's especially wonderful when we get both a great story AND spectacular effects, but those incidences are rare.
Dramas and non-effects-driven movies can wait for the home theater.