mkabi
-
Posts
702 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by mkabi
-
-
Speaking of Zombies... anybody else... well, here comes the disclaimer: I'm not crazy or anything 😄
And, it doesn't have to be Zombies, but anyone else had a conversation with anyone about possible end-of-world events that may happen in our lifetimes and is any of us preparing??? Like canned beans and a bunker?
I had this discussion with my wife after successfully growing kidney beans for my kid's Grade 1 project. I was like.... "hey if shit goes down... at least we got that and we can grow that...." and she was like "may be we should get more seeds [of other veggies] and canned foods".Lets be honest, there are too many people in this world (Nearing 8 billion worldwide??)... and well... God is shooting all kinds of shit at us to get the population down. I don't know what the exact stats are now with Covid-19.... but before the pandemic it was like for every second - 4.3 babies are born; and for that same second 1.8 people die. At some point - there is going to be some sort of major correction and/or world event where for every 4.3 babies being born... 43 people will die (just shooting some random number out there).
Hey.... I'm just starting the conversation.... I don't have a bunker or getaway.... but every once in a while I look into getting a fully armored hummer to get the hell out of here. Anyone else? Or is it just paranoid old me???
-
-
-
As we all get older... the excitement of things - because we have experienced it already.... wears down and wears thin. So we seek for those original thoughts, pieces, discoveries, explorations to reignite that excitement.
But, we also like to share that excitement, we show & share the same things that excites us with friends and family - we like to see that face and/or reaction on the uninitiated. Thereby reliving the moment that you first discovered it! I guess thats why those "reaction" videos do well on Youtube.
I love those moments when I show stuff from my childhood back to my kids and/or wife.
Anyway, anyone try MUBI? It delivers curated films - carefully selected arthouse films... something like 20 movies a month. I'm paraphrasing.... I've never used it before thats why I'm asking.
-
-
38 minutes ago, Thpriest said:
So what's the general feeling? The 4 rec lights and grey body not worth it? Is it a pointless camera or is there something I've missed?
nothing different from a7s3 (I was expecting atleast DCI and Anamorphic, but none of that) and $400 more... I mean.... if you feel that the exterior fluff is important to warrant additional $400... get it!
-
1 hour ago, Chrille said:
Wow, active facecooling - GAMECHANGER!
It’s an untapped market. They figured that the problem existed from their previous cameras burning and blistering their customer’s faces... now Canon is getting into the game... it’s only natural... a true professional doesn’t have time to run to the fridge for an ice pack. This is perfect for run and gun facecooling!!!
This is how you introduce a problem that never existed in the first place... and solve it too... brilliant.
-
In my opinion, look at the other subject matter in this forum and other forums -> see where the industry is headed.
If I were you... I would go for the Panasonic S1H.
I know the arguments about AF and lack of 4K/120fps.
But, if your impressed by Sony Venice and Red Cams <- remember they don't have proper AF either.
You can't argue with the higher Resolutions, Anamorphic Modes and its Netflix approved (this is actually the number 1 reason why I would recommend the S1H over the other cameras). Just so you know Netflix is planning on expanding on ABQ studios.... just saying...
-
Meh.... not worth arguing over.
-
54 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:
You're over simplifying. I can happily watch many things without consulting my phone. My wife though is another matter and will happily chat with friends, message, talk to me, insist I help her with dinner.... plus the odd occasion of someone at the door. Not so frequent this year, but still... so even if you're well behaved, others in the household are not.
There is still a place for cinema. Of course its always competing against TV. Hence one of the reasons why movies went wide-screen when TVs first entered peoples home; to open the cinema experience out. Unfortunately its hard to find something unique to cinema that can't be easily replicated at home. 3D was one such method, no doubt why cinemas tried to push it over 2D releases, but its waned since the peak a decade ago.
Obviously 2020 has been hard on cinemas, but prior to that, there was no evidence that cinemas were on their way out. Box office numbers in 2019 were good. I've seen a few larger cinema complexes built in the last decade. I've been in quite a few packed out cinema screenings. So I'd say its too early to predict the demise of cinema over streaming. Both have their place in delivering movies to the audience.
Whilst I've go fewer times now than I did 10 years ago, I still go half a dozen times a year and enjoy the experience. Yes, the adverts are annoying, and you get the odd bad experience with other members of the audience, but I enjoy the larger screen and sound system. Its nice to hear the movie loud without the neighbour bashing on your wall to turn it down, and my wife behaves much better too at the cinema... 😅😅😅
My wife behaves the same way... I feel like if its a nightly thing.... she does all that and more, but say I'm working and don't have time to watch TV.... a week or 2 passes by... and I have about a couple of hours to spare and watching a movie is the only option - my wife shuts up and watches a movie. Similarly a movie theatre does the same thing... its not like we are doing it everyday. Choose a movie night and lay down the rules.
-
On 12/11/2020 at 10:08 PM, KnightsFan said:
To bring it back to the topic, that's the exact argument against removing theaters. Theaters support filmmakers like Nolan and Tarantino, where fans pay extra to pick out a movie that they like and want to watch it in the "proper" setting, as opposed to streaming whatever is trending where generally the attitude is more often "well it's free* so I can't complain." Or People have it on in the background and tune out most of the content. Whether you like Nolan or not, you have to admit that he puts a lot more personal thought into his projects than the average Netflix production.
This is where our thought processes diverge...
Theatres don't support filmmakers... studios support filmmakers... I know you are going to say that theatres support studios and so from super structure point of view that if theatres support studios then theatres support the creatives/artists... right? Perhaps, but that only gives half the story.
Here you go: https://money.cnn.com/2002/03/08/smbusiness/q_movies/
Most of that article is about movie snacks and that garbage, but the biggest takeaways for me is that:
"Most of the money from ticket sales goes back to the movie studio. A film booker leases a movie to a particular theater for a set period of weeks. The percentage of ticket sales that the studio takes decreases on each week that a movie is in the theater. If the screening was arranged by an independent middleman, he also takes a slice. So the movie has to pull in sizeable audiences for several weeks in order for theater owners to make any serious profits.
During the film's opening week, the studio might take 70 to 80 percent of gross box office sales. By the fifth or sixth week, the percentage the studio takes will likely shrink to about 35 percent, said Steven Krams, president of International Cinema Equipment Co."
I know we are getting into Economics here, but if we are talking about leasing structure... streaming services also "lease" from studios.... see here:
Now, if you are going to talk about "proper" setting in your home versus a movie theatre.... yeah I agree.... but at the same time aren't you guys like Apple's 1984 commercial:
In my opinion, if you can't turn off your phones or be distracted without being in a movie theatre.... then the movie or show that you are watching at home isn't captivating enough. I wasn't born when "The Godfather" 1 & 2 came out, nor was I born when the "Star Wars: A New Hope" and I was just born when Empire Strikes back came out, and about 3 years old when Return of the Jedi came out (yeah, you can guess my age by all this), and what I'm getting at is that I wasn't around or old enough to watch those movies in theatres... where did I watch those??? Thats right, in my living room on VHS, DVDs and now streaming.
Sure.... there are plenty of stuff that is polluting the streaming service and I can't watch more than half the stuff on there.... but sometimes you have to look through the fluff and find that diamond in the rough. Stuff that captivated me made me watch it without being distracted: "Tiger King", "Last Dance", "Surviving R. Kelly", "Chernobyl" (still watching this by the way), "Itaewon Class", first few seasons of "Stranger Things", first season of "13 reasons why"... thats all I can think of at present.... but you get it.
-
21 hours ago, KnightsFan said:
Like we agree, it happened or is happening in all industries and ultimately it's worse for a large number of people, and better for a small number of people. Technology has increased that trend. Here's an example:
Theaters employed thousands of low paid cashiers, janitors, middle class managers, owners. A streaming service might employ a few dozen highly paid software engineers instead. This is not the fault of the software engineers and ideally they should be rewarded for doing skilled labor and increasing efficiency. But if we don't figure out a way to deal with the large number of displaced workers, wealth disparity will grow. More people fighting over fewer low paying jobs means the wages of those jobs will go down. And of course it's simply impossible to expect everyone to work harder or become a software engineer, because A) there aren't as many jobs required B) we don't have the resources to educate everyone as software engineers and C) not everyone has the aptitiude.
I guess that's straying a bit off topic, but it is related.
It's not anymore.
I feel that all of it is going to implode on itself eventually. The billionaires are not going to get on their knees to clean every room in their 1000 room mansion... nor will they build their own homes by themselves. Even if there are layoffs in the middle class area where reasonable knowledge is required... what I often witness is that there is deep regret afterwards, because they have to waste money and time finding a reasonable substitute, or whoever takes on the duties is overwhelmed and overworked then the company pays in the long run from letting go not one but 2 (even if the guy goes on vacation is like all hell broke out). Even if we are talking about automating and Netflix... at the end of the day... there is always going to be something in this world that you can’t automate... such as creative endeavours, food prep (gourmet foods), etc.
And, if you are one of those people that lost their job for whatever reason... it’s time to learn new skills and find an opportunity that is irreplaceable...
-
10 hours ago, KnightsFan said:
A couple examples of top earners getting massive deals is exactly what I'm saying is wrong. The industry as a whole is making plenty of money, but the middle class worker base is shrinking with a few rising to the very top and most losing jobs or getting lower pay. Same as every other industry, actually.
Exactly. It is as you stated like “every other industry”. But, I don’t have a problem with that...
Now, as an example... I don’t expect the person straight out of high school - getting his/her first job as a server at McDonald’s to be making the same amount as the CEO of McDonalds. Obviously, the current CEO had to earn their way to the top... they didn’t just magically get there.
Now, there are times where Nepotism, favouritism and/or connections comes into play... I hope that it is less in companies that are public over private companies, as board of directors vote for CEOS, and they have to have investor’s interest and confidence; yet I’m not naive enough to believe it doesn’t exist at all in public companies. Private companies on the other hand... well... it is what it is... but at the same time... come on... you build a company... you should decide who you want as your right hand man, who you want to promote, who you want to demote, who should replace you, or who you want to fire. How is it any different from building yourself a house??? Not everyone that you decide to live there at first... can and/or should live there forever - upon the owner’s judgment.
Look, now... Perhaps... you can’t see my point of view, but I am trying to build a few businesses myself and I don’t need people to come at me in 30 years, because they cannot see the blood sweat and tears that I put into the businesses over those 30 years.
sorry, I went a bit off track... but going back to artists... you can’t expect some fresh face from Juilliard’s drama program be paid the same as Daniel Day Lewis <- he earned his spot... period.
The other problem that exists is the fact that people don’t know anything about show business... show business is 10% show (talent) and 90% business. How often do you see an independent movie without a production house behind them, no promotions, no Oscar buzz... make it to millions of dollars? Forget billions...
2 hours ago, KnightsFan said:It's worth pointing out that Netflix had a net free cash flow of -$3.3 billion last year. Which isn't to say it's losing money, almost no successful startups have positive balance sheets for their first few years or even decades, but it's not like Netflix is making gobs of net money.
I don’t want to jump to conclusions, so I have to ask... do you think Netflix is a startup???
3 hours ago, zerocool22 said:But there are only a handfull watchable netflix original films. Only "the irishman" and "the devil all the time" come to mind. So if we become reliable to only netflix original content we might be in trouble. Hbo for instance isnt even available over here in Belgium. Most netflix content looks like easy consumable content for netflix and chill and you forget what you watched after a day.
I have to agree... As much money as they are blowing... nothing is memorable... in terms of movies. I didn’t even like The Irishman.
But, their shows on the other hand, I like... can’t complain.
-
1 hour ago, KnightsFan said:
...but if all of it goes to the AT&T and Netflix execs, the way it did for music, then I do think it warrants pessimism...
As opposed it going to the studios??? And, movie theatre chains???
Look... Scorsese’s Irishmen went straight to Netflix...
Dave Chappelle got a 60 million dollar - 3 special deal with Netflix...
Joe Rogen signed a $100 million dollar deal with Spotify.
Just saying... as much as you think that the artists are not getting their pay... just not completely correct.
Music industry went the way it went because people were pirating the music online anyway.
-
15 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:
I can't see it myself. Those with an interest in cinema have already bought all of that stuff.
What changes?
Just because Matrix 4 comes to streaming first, and you can't go to the cinema - you are not, as an average mainstream ex-cinemagoer, going to spend $3000 on gear for that are you?
I disagree with that too I'm afraid. What is the point of a director at all if the customer makes all the decisions?
(Yes The choice of viewing device is a creative decision)
Sure, and they can already spend their money on Netflix, or whatever. I don't care.
But depriving cinemas of content at a time like this is a bad move for culture.
We need the rousing blockbuster social experience like never before. New Bond film at Christmas. That kind of thing.
Short sighted beancounters at the studios risk killing that future.
It's short term thinking.
The math and damn statistics are nothing to do with it. Emotionally I can tell the difference between a big cinema screen and a TV! It's a completely separate experience.
sounds quite charming to me 🙂
Music streaming has killed music.
They are not paying per film. It's a monthly sub, creative cloud style. Do you want to tie yourself into 10 of those all at once just to get the same selection of studio content you would at any one time in one cinema? Sounds fucking expensive to me!
I can just see it following the music industry to a tee.
Smaller artists lose out from Spotify in big fashion.
The pirated copies of HBO Max streams will be full HD, 1080p, probably identical quality to what you get from the paid service.
In my opinion, these will all be outdated ideals in the end.
im sure the drive-in theatres, beta-max, horse carriages all felt the same way. Poor horse carriages.
Time to pack up and move on.
-
15 hours ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:
Any one ever saw a iPhone teardown?
It is a battery, a tiny mainboard, two or 3 camera modules, screen module and some connectors. The BOM cost for this in the iPhone 12 Pro is US$406 (https://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_12_pro_bom_come_up_to_406-news-46442.php), probably much less, since Apple could get massive discounts buying it in bunch. Let's say it goes to US$300.
Almost no mechanical adjustments needed, the assembly might be very cheap. Easily the profit is around 300% per unit.
Now get a Nikon camera, see the immense complexity of it, the much higher price of a much bigger sensor (made in fractions of quantity of smaller smartphone chips), the amount of mechanical adjustments needed, which translates in much costly labor.
Probably the profit is MUCH lower, with more complexity, and in 2019 Nikon sold around 1.73 million units between DSLR and mirrorless. Apple sold around 37,7 million units of the iPhone 11 in the FIRST HALF of 2020.
My bets is that they don't give a damn to the traditional camera market.Ever watch Shark Tank or Dragon's Den?
The point of the game, for any company selling any products -> 1 product (cost to make XX amount) but sell for 3 to 4 times XX amount. But, if you are selling it for 3 to 4 times XX amount, that amount has to make sense to the customer.
At the beginning the iphone was like $699 (top end model - and yeah times and part prices have changed too over the last decade or so) - nonetheless, its slowly climbed to $1199 and customers deem it worthy to pay that...
So, if Nikon isn't selling it for 3 to 4 times the amount to create it... whose fault is that??? May be they feel that if they put in 6K @ 60p into their camera and charged $6K for it, nobody would buy it?
-
4 hours ago, independent said:
And you’d be wrong, because nobody is editing iPhone footage on Final Cut Pro on Mac Pros, iMac Pro’s, etc. Nobody. iPhones aren’t selling Macs.
iPhones are Apple's main source of income not Macs... period.
Just because you aren't doing that doesnt mean "nobody". And, I've already named 2 hollywood movies filmed on iPhone i.e. Tangerine and Unsane.
I was going to write a bunch of stuff.... but I will let Andrew's last words sink in... also read other people's posts as well, especially Danyyyel. If you're not seeing the clues.... I don't know.... I can't help you....
-
2 hours ago, independent said:
Red is for sale?
If they are, Apple just might, just to own the patents. My guess is that JJ will never sell, because he loves himself more than money.
Apple's patent challenge against Red is a much stronger sign of their interest in the pro camera business; Prores Raw is limited to mostly Atomos external, which is a bottleneck in many ways.
In fact, think about the Canon R5 and Sony a7s3's HEVC h.265 footage, which is impossible to play or edit on most machines. Except of course, the new Macs, which can edit them quite cheaply. Bingo.
Again, why wouldn't Apple want to release a professional camera that would boost their entire ecosystem? They are pushing various technologies that really only make sense if they add the final piece to the puzzle.
I think that you’re missing all the warning signs and red signals.
- Samsung left.
- Olympus sold their shit and left.
- Nikon might leave.
- Photokina terminated.
Again... why would Apple enter when everyone is leaving?
I know... you are going to pull the ecosystem argument on me... but hear me out.
Pro res... created long a ago... it’s not new... they didn’t create it to ultimately get into the camera business... they created it so that Artistic people can buy their computers... “Oh your videos don’t play back smoothly on your Windows PC? Well, I bet they playback smoothly on a Mac... cause we have pro-res... switch!!!” They are just doing that “supply and demand” a la Wolf of Wall Street - sell me a pen scenario.
I initially didn’t understand their approach to the M1 chip... but after asking myself - why would they do that?? From a “supply and demand” point of view.... They know 8K is the future, there isn’t many people that have it yet, but let’s get ahead of the curve, because they know that the R5 is just the beginning and if the footage from that isn’t editing properly on their Macs without proxies... it just presents an opportunity for someone else to swoop in...
I seriously think that Apple seriously believes that their “professional” camera is the iPhone... there... I said it.
And, I’ll be honest... my wife does YouTube videos... she films, edits and throws on our 55 inch TV for our family to review and uploads it straight to YouTube all from her iPhone. Do you understand how easy that workflow is???
You don’t need to work with multiple devices.
You don’t need to offload from memory card.
You don’t need to transcode or create proxies.
You don’t need to sit at a desk to edit... I mean laptops were supposed to be the portable take along... but this... imagine... you going to Bahamas with the family. You don’t have to worry about the heavy equipment - just your phone. You take all your photos and videos on the phone... on the way back... you edit the stuff on the plane. Upload it on Facebook when you’re in the cab on the way home. Boom! Done... call it a day.
In fact... after saying that out loud... I would say PCs and laptops are also a dying breed of equipment.
-
6 hours ago, Matt Perks said:
I am indeed! I meant to thank bloggers (including Andrew specifically) for bringing the issue of overheating up so much. The pressure about the timer nonsense forced Canon to change the way the camera monitors temperatures, which is the reason the mod works at all.
You should create a mod-kit.
I mean... kickstarter is all you need to get it started. You don't even need to do so much either. You have the demo of it in the video (already).... sell the copper cut-out piece with the thermal paste at $250 a piece with a warning (voiding warranty). You don't need the fan.... just changing the 2 hour recovery time to 5 min. is more than enough.
-
5 hours ago, independent said:
Well, Samsung is mostly an electronics company. Apple is much more than that. They develop their own codecs to be edited in their own software, run on their own computers, viewed on their own monitors, and published to their cloud services. The only thing missing is their own pro camera. The iPhone cameras don't require any of Apple's hardware and software, so nothing is to be gained there. Only a pro camera would really take advantage of Apple's ecosystem (and help sell products and services).
Of course, Apple doesn't need Nikon; its brand is plenty strong enough, and whatever savings in R&D might not matter because Apple would probably pursue a radical redesign of both internals and externals.
Also, Apple is close enough already; how hard would it be accommodate a large sensor into their existing iPhone camera processing infrastructure? They're 99% of the way there.
Samsung is a business as is a Apple - if Samsung didn't see any profit in it, then why would Apple?
Cause they have an ecosystem? Apple's very own iphone is what is cutting into the camera business... If anything, they will keep improving the sensor, lens and software behind the iphone to keep cutting into the camera business... bye bye cameras - hello iphone <- one stop-shop tool for everything - including making movies.
Movies already made on the iphone - Tangerine and Unsane. Do you really think that trend (making a movie on the iphone) would die away, or grow in popularity? Especially with the improvements to the iphone (overtime).
Would you agree or disagree? Current iphones beat out any digital video cameras of the 90s?
Ok, now lets do the math - How long will it take a train leaving Station B at 100 km/hr to catch up to a train leaving Station A at 90km/hr? I'm joking..... but in a similar manner... Phones in general have a yearly refresh, whereas ILC cameras 2 to 5 years - how long before the iphone catches up to current cameras?
I give iphone another 2 to 3 iterations before having 8K and 4K/120p
-
1 hour ago, independent said:
And that’s why I think it’s a no brainer for Apple to produce a completely reimagined and redesigned pro camera, because they have the pro software and pro hardware for complete integration. They can make the most efficient camera with the most cutting edge technologies with brilliant design, and you will shoot on their codec, edit in their software suite, on their computers and monitors, and publish on their platforms.
Apple can.... but won't...
I'm sure its probably the same reason why Samsung pulled out after the NX1.
Plus, I don't think they want to monopolize the industry - nothing good comes out of it - you just get sued and put into submission.
-
I'm sure a lot of us feel the same.
Nikon name is legendary, just as legendary as Canon.
I like the design and look of the Z cams - just the inside don't match the outside. Z6 II & Z7 II should have had more than what they offered - they should've aimed for what the R5 was offering, instead they were offering less than what the S5 was offering.
-
-
13 hours ago, MrSMW said:
OK, no problem.
1: Shoot with intent in the first place. I rarely shoot anything 'just because' and if I know it's going to be garbage, don't bother in the first place. Once I know I have what I want which is typically, A: the obvious and B: the more creative, I stop shooting that/any scene and move on. Net result, from a typical wedding day, I might come back with 300+ clips.
2: I'm shooting 2 cameras: The first is designated 'filming' and is for capturing clips and is on a freestanding monopod. The other is designated 'video' and is for longer stuff ie, the ceremony and the speeches and lives on a tripod. The latter also records the master audio using Rode Wireless Go.
3: Get back from the job and download cards.
4: Start watching footage straight from the folder and I simply note all clips that have potential and scribble a few notes if needs be in regard to how/where I am going to use certain clips or something else specific.
5: In Premiere, dump the ceremony footage and audio onto the timeline. Add the ceremony lav mic audio. Auto-sync. Cut & delete master (the Go material) when and where individual lav mic material is better such as readings and vows.
6: It's a single viewpoint piece, so there is no visual material to mess with, just the audio. Add a fade in and add a fade out. Export, job done. There's no 'grading' as such as I don't shoot log though I may make a global adjustment to exposure or contrast etc, but nothing that takes longer than a couple of minutes max. Seconds normally.
7: Repeat same process for speeches. Couple of hours max and these 2 productions are finished.
8: Chop & copy the vows out of the ceremony plus a few key lines from each of the speeches and dump all of these onto a new timeline for the 'Wedding Film'. I have already chosen which 2-3 tracks I will be using which I did on the previous job I was editing photography on, ie, I listen to Artlist.io whilst editing photography and marking favourites for potential future wedding film use. I then group tracks into blocks of 2 or 3 to make approx 8-12 minute productions and choose one for whatever film job I am about to start based on 'feel' such as "this one felt a bit more lively" or "this one suits something more gentle" etc.
9: So dump my 2-3 tracks on the timeline which now has these tracks plus synced/finished footage/audio from vows and speeches.
10: Start dragging over clips and building the story based on 2 factors; chronological order of events and the soundtrack. It doesn't take long to add and cut 50-100 clips.
11: Tidy up all the material into one cohesive whole other than any grading or transitions or ducking etc.
12: Tweak each clip in order as in 'grading' except in my case, it's not really grading as such as all I am doing is making a few minor scopes adjustments mainly, add any transitions and duck anything that needs ducking.
13: Export and watch through and then go back to make any final adjustments and add titles.
I can't think of anything else really.
The bottom line for me is that having come from being a photographer, I think and work like a photographer who just happens to be capturing longer versions of my photography in addition to my photography. It actually requires very little thought, barely more time on the job and obviously more time in the office, but not these weeks and weeks I hear some folks talking about.
And as I said before, I don't overshoot, I don't dither, I don't procrastinate and naturally am very efficient, do not get distracted easily and work extremely quickly compared to most.
I hope that helps!
Yeah. I don't have patience like you bros. Just thinking about rewatching 300+ clips (from point 1) straight for another 8 hours (or less; from point 4) is making my stomach turn. Each to his/her own...
But, this shows the dedication you need to remain happy in this industry. Do that 15 to 20 times a year, just for weddings.... and you will know if that is what you want to do.... even if its for short term.
8 hours ago, IronFilm said:Was Kickstarter.
They're a company which has been around for many many many years. This brand is a major player in the pro sound world for tv/film.
Kickstarter was more an avenue to help them get the word out. And that Kickstarter campaign is over anyway.
Get it now if you want to.
Thanks for the heads up; ordered.
The new Matrix trailer
In: Cameras
Posted
Definitely a "look" to fit how movies are made today.
Do I like it... not really - but I'm more interested in the storyline and the direction that (atleast) one of the original creators will take this movie. Its definitely hitting the right notes with regards to my nostalgic preferences.
But... its always been about the storylines for me. Get past the glitz and glamour, get past the CGI, get past the colouring, get past the editorial choices and cuts, get past the BGM or musical choices -> hit an original storyline and I'm in.... I don't want a regurgitated storyline just because its supposed to be nostalgic - I would rather watch the original series for that.