This is unforgivable that an officially released product is not using up to date technology. I bet it's just Prince being cheap again!






Has anyone considered that the aladdin looks the way it does on purpose. This is Prince; I don't think he would not understand the picture quality. The look on the DVD is perfect for the music they are playing. On some of those pull back shots where the stage and the lights are all fuzz, right as Rhonda's bass goes all fuzz, I can imagine Neal Cassidy showing up in the back of the theatre hootin and hollerin.
just an incredible show

paintsprayer said:

paintsprayer said:

...or it could be he was trying to make it look like a classic 40's style movie.
[This message was edited Wed Sep 10 9:02:36 PDT 2003 by LittlePill]

paintsprayer said:

This is a misconception.


There was nothing "cheap" about the finished black and white print of 'Under The Cheery Moon'.

In fact, the transferral from colour stock to black and white, just to accommodate Prince's wishes, resulted in the UTCM's production's budget rocketting sky-high.


.

IN CASE U NEVER NOTICED,IT DID SAY USING THE TRUE COLORS(OR SOMETHING 2 THAT EFFECT)B&W

giotto said:[quote]

paintsprayer said:

he totally did the movie in B&W on purpose - not to cut costs . . .

it would be cool though - if the master were in color somewhere and THAT was released on DVD!!! we could actually see those suits. it wasn't fair that we couldn't see the blue suit he was asking Tricky should he wear before they went out. . .

giotto said:

I think y'all are missing the point of this thread...

booyah said:

Help us Booyah!

cborgman said:

They spit.

booyah said:

I think everyone is addressing the first point of this thread, booyah.

Patience.

.

FunkMistress said:

this thread swallows...

I love it in Black and White and no it was not done to cut costs, lol. Is it cheaper to make a black and white movie anyways??? Black and white film is more expensive then color...

cborgman said:

cborgman said:

Thanks to you now it does...

.

giotto said:

sorry, i had to... the joke was there... i can't let a setup go unpuchlined no matter how cheap the joke is...

no to mention this is like the 400th thread dedicated to the "the dvd looks like crap/no it doesn't and you're not a real fan and you need to get out of the org!/well, you're an idiot fammie/shut up/no, you shut up/no, you shut up" discussion. some pople think it looks like crap, some people don't what tis the point in starting a whole bunch more threads to encourage more of this insanity?

No, YOU shut up!!

and by the way, it is in fact more expensive to shoot in black in white, but UTCM was not filmed in black and white. it was filmed in color and then got a B&W transfer.

and while i really don't like UTCM, the cinematography on it is pretty damn good.

FunkMistress said:

Co-sign.

cborgman said:

You...you don't like the movie???

People seriously haven't realised the point of the first part of paintsprayer's post???

I'm sure that paintsprayer is well aware that UTCM was meant to look how it looked, and likewise is suggesting that the Aladdin DVD was also meant to look like that.

Personally, I disagree as I believe it was just simply done on the cheap (although I like the DVD and aren't bothered by the quality).

But I can't believe that people haven't worked out that the first paragraph of the post was simply mocking those that have been endlessly complaining about the Aladdin DVD quality.

Perhaps a at the end of the first paragraph might have been an idea?

FunkMistress said:

parts of it are good... it's the best acting he has done, jerome is great, and KST is pretty damn good. the black and white is nice, the location shots are pretty, the cinematography is great. love the juxtaposition of the 40s with the 80s.

parts of it are bad... the writing really lacks, and so does the direction. the ending is quite awful. there was a happy ending shot that i wish i could see.

a romantic comedy where the leads gets murdered in the end... how... not romantic comedy.

Haystack said:

no, i got it, it's jsut after 3 weeks of little flame wars and endless threads meant to start these little wars, it's gotten old.

and really, what director has ever said "NO! NO! IT'S IN FOCUS!! I WANT IT OUT OF FOCUS! I WANT THIS TOO LOOK BAD! THAT'S WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT!!"

and the poster also fails to realize that prince directed UTCM but not the DVD

I like it because it's not predictable. Who would have expected that he die in the end. Finally something unpredictable.

cborgman said:

I didn't get it at all. All coffee and no breakfast makes Jill a gun-jumper.

shortnsweet said:

i can see that... and part of me wants to agree with you. my only problem with it is that if you want to do something unpredictable, you have to set a tone or tiny little hints for that within the story, by having other little unpredictabilites. a perfect example would be fight club.

the ending of UCTM was just jarring for me personally, and silly as hell. his really horrid acting as he dies, and the fact that what father outside of a tragedy would have their daughters love killed for little to no reason?

i swear to gawd i thought this wuz gonna be a testimonial about how somebody just found out that utcm wasn't in color upon watchin it for the first time...

cborgman said:

Hoo boy, I just got in fom painting my house (irony noted but not intended). I really thought everyone would get what I meant.
Yes I know who directed what.
"look bad" is subjective.

As far as rehashing old subjects; I've seen people say there is no problem with picture quality, but I haven't seen this point of view covered: that the picture is a little off,but it was intentional. Sorry if it was covered already and I missed it.