I think I have! 14 years since I bought it and now not really interested in home cinema and won’t be buying another one. How about you?
Have you outgrown your home cinema and film collection?
- Thread starter Freddy
- Start date
michael hoy
Well-known member
Samd
Well-known member
I'm really tee'd off at the mo with mine. Had to do some adjustments yesterday and only found out this morning that I must have dislodged one of the centre speaker wires from the AVR so the whole lot has to come out again!!!
Look forward to hearing about your upgrade, Michael. Yes, I still prefer my cinema system to being at the cinema.
Arron
Well-known member
"Have you outgrown your home cinema and film collection?" -- no
What's missing for you?
Why have you lost interest? Is it because of the lack of good movies over the last few years? Because more will come. I have a projector and a screen so big the front door can't open when it's down. Watching Top Gun: Maverick on it a few weeks ago was a blast. Hollywood made a ton of money from it which means more proper cinematic movies will get made.
What's missing for you?
Lack of good movies, poor HDR movies in 4K. Owned a home cinema for the last 20 years, been there and done and more, now just can’t be bothered with it."Have you outgrown your home cinema and film collection?" -- no
Why have you lost interest? Is it because of the lack of good movies over the last few years? Because more will come. I have a projector and a screen so big the front door can't open when it's down. Watching Top Gun: Maverick on it a few weeks ago was a blast. Hollywood made a ton of money from it which means more proper cinematic movies will get made.
What's missing for you?
Top Gun Maverick was excellent though and thoroughly enjoyed it but for some reason have no desire to own the Blu-Ray and listen to the Master Audio soundtrack and watch the quality picture. Whereas in the past I definitely would’ve.
Arron
Well-known member
On the HDR front, you might be in for a long wait. To do it well, both the director and cinematographer have to really know what they're doing. There are only a few out there with a clue. It means using cameras in ways that are mostly against traditional ways of shooting. It's not difficult but it has to be planned and pretty much baked-in to the concept from the start, i.e. you can't just rock up on the day and shoot something that will wow, you have to plan the shots meticulously. I'm praying Tron Legacy will get a 4K HDR release for exactly that reason -- Joe Kosinski is one of the few directors who can think in HDR.
Cinema has some major problems that have built up over the last few decades. First, CGI meant anything that could be imagined could be made but that led to its over-use. Actors reacting to things they can't see on a green screen has become old.
Second, the people creating the CGI are staring at small screens which means we've lost a lot of what made cinema cinematic. The great vistas aren't seen much any more because the people creating movies don't have to leave their offices.
Third, we're going through a really bad moralising phase. Possibly the worst one cinema has ever had. Almost everything is the movie equivalent of Christian rock starring Steven Seagal. Except he's been replaced at the last minute by a female lead without changing the character or dialogue. Almost every story is like an 80s straight to VHS b-movie martial arts flick made by evangelists.
So where's the good news? Well, CGI is now so commonplace that you can't just slap some of it on screen and expect people to be impressed. The lessons are starting to be learned. Top Gun Maverick is a good example of that where the CGI use was really careful -- they only used it where they absolutely had to. You can't rent an SU-57. It's not a great movie but it's a very solid movie and has no whiff of Christian rock or female Steven Seagal.
On the green screen from, the production methods are changing which you can see really well in The Mandalorian. Not great storytelling by any means but it sells the visuals well because the actors can see the CGI as they're playing against which in turn means they can give a more convincing performance.
On the boring moralising front, too many studios have lost too much money. This also happened in the past. The era of Gary Cooper and John Wayne was just as morally monotonous. And that was slapped out of the cinema by people like Sergio Leone. Audiences leapt on Top Gun Maverick because they'd been starved of even mediocre stories. The parallels with A Fistful of Dollars have already been noticed because Hollywood investors want to make their money back with interest.
We're going through a bad patch but the good times will come again
Cinema has some major problems that have built up over the last few decades. First, CGI meant anything that could be imagined could be made but that led to its over-use. Actors reacting to things they can't see on a green screen has become old.
Second, the people creating the CGI are staring at small screens which means we've lost a lot of what made cinema cinematic. The great vistas aren't seen much any more because the people creating movies don't have to leave their offices.
Third, we're going through a really bad moralising phase. Possibly the worst one cinema has ever had. Almost everything is the movie equivalent of Christian rock starring Steven Seagal. Except he's been replaced at the last minute by a female lead without changing the character or dialogue. Almost every story is like an 80s straight to VHS b-movie martial arts flick made by evangelists.
So where's the good news? Well, CGI is now so commonplace that you can't just slap some of it on screen and expect people to be impressed. The lessons are starting to be learned. Top Gun Maverick is a good example of that where the CGI use was really careful -- they only used it where they absolutely had to. You can't rent an SU-57. It's not a great movie but it's a very solid movie and has no whiff of Christian rock or female Steven Seagal.
On the green screen from, the production methods are changing which you can see really well in The Mandalorian. Not great storytelling by any means but it sells the visuals well because the actors can see the CGI as they're playing against which in turn means they can give a more convincing performance.
On the boring moralising front, too many studios have lost too much money. This also happened in the past. The era of Gary Cooper and John Wayne was just as morally monotonous. And that was slapped out of the cinema by people like Sergio Leone. Audiences leapt on Top Gun Maverick because they'd been starved of even mediocre stories. The parallels with A Fistful of Dollars have already been noticed because Hollywood investors want to make their money back with interest.
We're going through a bad patch but the good times will come again
davidf
Well-known member
No, I haven’t. Watched over 1,000 films last year. I do find myself rewatching a lot of films though rather than watching new ones, and only a third of the films I watched were new, or previously unseen films. I feel better knowing what I’m going to get, watching films I know I’ll be entertained by, rather than being let down by woke, box-ticking filmmaking and poor straight-to-streaming TV movies. I think those who aren’t into rewatching movies, and like to continually watch something new, are struggling for quality content.
I mentioned this in another thread, but one problem we have is that streaming platforms are quickly trying to create their own content, and the more they can add, the more they can be perceived to be offering you a lot of (exclusive) choice - the quality of that choice is secondary. Making a film for TV is quite different to making a film for the cinema, and that shows (if you’re really into film). Before streaming came along, films were generally made for the cinema, and have quite a different look to something made for the small screen. I finally got to see Jaws at the cinema last month (in an IMAX theatre, so very big screen), and one scene in particular stuck out straight away to me, despite watching this film every year. This scene doesn’t really stand out on 55” TV, and nor would it on any other sized TV. The opening credits to The Shining are another case in point, and films like Blade Runner 2049.
As much as I love watching films at home, and it doesn’t matter how much better they look or sound at home, there’s nothing like watching a film at the cinema. Whether or not you love or hate them, the recent King Kong and Godzilla films have looked amazing on big screens. Home doesn’t compete with that. My concern is that the convenience (laziness) of movie streaming at home will eventually kill off cinemas, and then no one will be able to appreciate these glorious looking films as they’re intended to be seen. And in turn, the art of cinematic movie making will be consigned to the history books. In the 50s, there were over 80 cinemas in Birmingham - you could easily leave home and walk to one within half an hour. Now, it’s an inconvenient drive for everyone. My nearest is 5 miles away.
I mentioned this in another thread, but one problem we have is that streaming platforms are quickly trying to create their own content, and the more they can add, the more they can be perceived to be offering you a lot of (exclusive) choice - the quality of that choice is secondary. Making a film for TV is quite different to making a film for the cinema, and that shows (if you’re really into film). Before streaming came along, films were generally made for the cinema, and have quite a different look to something made for the small screen. I finally got to see Jaws at the cinema last month (in an IMAX theatre, so very big screen), and one scene in particular stuck out straight away to me, despite watching this film every year. This scene doesn’t really stand out on 55” TV, and nor would it on any other sized TV. The opening credits to The Shining are another case in point, and films like Blade Runner 2049.
As much as I love watching films at home, and it doesn’t matter how much better they look or sound at home, there’s nothing like watching a film at the cinema. Whether or not you love or hate them, the recent King Kong and Godzilla films have looked amazing on big screens. Home doesn’t compete with that. My concern is that the convenience (laziness) of movie streaming at home will eventually kill off cinemas, and then no one will be able to appreciate these glorious looking films as they’re intended to be seen. And in turn, the art of cinematic movie making will be consigned to the history books. In the 50s, there were over 80 cinemas in Birmingham - you could easily leave home and walk to one within half an hour. Now, it’s an inconvenient drive for everyone. My nearest is 5 miles away.
Arron
Well-known member
The diagonal of the screen needs to be bigger than the distance of your main seating position. It's not a cheap route but I'll put a big recommendation on a projector at home. At that point, with a decent sound system, cinematic scenes look and sound cinematic. And regularly wishing for a sniper in the projector booth is history
Arron
Well-known member
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram