[REL] X (1986) directed by Oddvar Einarson

User avatar
Ziggy Plock
Posts: 310
Likes:
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2020 10:11 am

Re: [REL] X (1986) directed by Oddvar Einarson

Post by Ziggy Plock »   0 likes

Did not know it was called 'cell animation', but then, I just don't get out much, they feed me through the bunghole...
Then what's your opinion on movies like Ratatouille, which is clearly fake in your use of the concept, but, to quote Truman C. "real phoney"... and 3D?
I like the way CGI was used in 'The Mandalorian' to create Luke Skywalker (hurray for Isla Farris! ;-) ), and Will Smith in "Gemini Man".
I also like the animation in the Final Fantasy movies.
Also consider that green screen acting is more admirable than acting in a realistic setting or set, since the actors have to rely more on their own imagination.
——————————————————————————A tribute to Lost Movies===My avatar: youtu.be/SdqsgEOBOlc——————————————————————————
[Image]
User avatar
Night457
Global Moderator
Posts: 5221
Likes:
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2019 3:44 pm

Re: [REL] X (1986) directed by Oddvar Einarson

Post by Night457 »   0 likes

Ziggy Plock wrote:Did not know it was called 'cell animation'
Most people don't, and I am a movie geek. So I have to be ready to explain what I mean. It is not at all necessary for a viewer to know these terms to enjoy the show. I just wasn't sure if you were being sarastic along the lines of "Cell animation, what the heck is that old thing?"
Then what's your opinion on movies like Ratatouille, which is clearly fake in your use of the concept, but, to quote Truman C. "real phoney"... and 3D?
I have not specifically seen that one but I have no objection to computer-animated cartoons, because IT IS faster and cheaper. I like the original "Shrek" - because of the story and characters. In the world of cartoons, I don't consider either hand-drawing or computer-drawing any more or less "fake" because they are all obviously drawings, not looking like real people. I simply prefer the style of (uh) "traditional cell animation." It is simply an aesthetic preference, not any hard and fast LAW for me. Given enough time and clever computer programmers, they can probably come up with a computer animation that LOOKS like cell animation and fools me. I don't know that is what the public wants, though, and if they did it then they would be sure to heavily promote their amazing technological feat. I would then know about it and not be fooled.

(3D gives me a headache, but I could watch the 2D version of Ratatouille.)

I am afraid I have not seen any of your examples of the CGI people, except for short clips from the first Final Fantasy film. (Which looks terribly fake to me, but it IS 21 years old now.) It is just something I avoid, like some people don't watch slasher films.
Also consider that green screen acting is more admirable than acting in a realistic setting or set, since the actors have to rely more on their own imagination.
If I had seen examples where such talent was on greater display, I might be more impressed too! From what I have seen, what we get is spectacularly imaginative surroundings with uninspired performances. This is most prevalent when the actors are all filmed separately so they can not even interact with each other. That does not seem an especially rewarding way to work to ME, unless they are giving a Shakespearian monologue on stage, where they get energy and feedback from the audience.

We can extend your logic even further and demand that the AUDIENCE use their imagination too: just have the actors giving unadorned performances in a total single-color environment. (Supply your own special effects, you lazy bastards.) Something a little close to this would be George Lucas' "THX-1138," which has a good portion of it in a white void, and Lars Von Trier's "Dogville" with minimalist sets.

But when you have sets, props and actors all created by a room full of animators clicking on their computers, it ceases to be an art form made up of live action photography and instead becomes all cartoons. I like cartoons. They have their merits and are an art form in themselves. I do not watch ONLY cartoons. I do not want to give up the live action. If that is what Hollyweird wants, then I still have over a hundred years of old movies to catch up on.
User avatar
Ziggy Plock
Posts: 310
Likes:
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2020 10:11 am

Re: [REL] X (1986) directed by Oddvar Einarson

Post by Ziggy Plock »   0 likes

i've now downloaded the 3 gb version of "X" but it seems to me a waste of space. I prefer my small sized, 900kbps 960x540 version.
——————————————————————————A tribute to Lost Movies===My avatar: youtu.be/SdqsgEOBOlc——————————————————————————
[Image]
User avatar
Ziggy Plock
Posts: 310
Likes:
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2020 10:11 am

Re: [REL] X (1986) directed by Oddvar Einarson

Post by Ziggy Plock »   1 likes

deadman wrote:
ghost wrote:So, which software were u using?
Haven't tried it, I'm just wondering if anyone has experience with software that transcribes speech into text and whether or not any of them can do it from an audio file with multiple voices. Any movie could be subtitled automatically from its own soundtrack. Your computer creates the timecodes and the text in its original language, then maybe does a rough translation. You only have to read through the .srt and make corrections. Speech recognition is everywhere. If the current crop of programs can't do it, we won't have to wait long for one that can.
I visited Vietnam in 2017, and when I asked this girl for directions, she pulled out her phone, spoke Vietnamese into it, and it talked back to me in English. Google English, tbh, but comprehensible.


and doesn't youtube transcribes speech into subtitles? Sort of?
——————————————————————————A tribute to Lost Movies===My avatar: youtu.be/SdqsgEOBOlc——————————————————————————
[Image]
User avatar
Night457
Global Moderator
Posts: 5221
Likes:
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2019 3:44 pm

Re: [REL] X (1986) directed by Oddvar Einarson

Post by Night457 »   0 likes

Ziggy Plock wrote:and doesn't youtube transcribes speech into subtitles? Sort of?
Sort of ... terrible. Hilariously innacurate for English, and it can not even get the timecodes right.

The idea has great potential but the Youtube version does not impress me. I used it once for creating a subtitle file and the errors were so frequent that it was more trouble than it was worth.

Your example of live translation on cellphones DOES impress me, and is one of the cases where I see modern technology to be of great benefit. I guess it isn't all bad.
User avatar
Ziggy Plock
Posts: 310
Likes:
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2020 10:11 am

Re: [REL] X (1986) directed by Oddvar Einarson

Post by Ziggy Plock »   1 likes

Night457 wrote:Your example of live translation on cellphones DOES impress me, and is one of the cases where I see modern technology to be of great benefit. I guess it isn't all bad.
Then I found this site:

https://www.happyscribe.com/translate-j ... to-english

I used it succesfully to confirm an age of an actress...

The reverse strategy is:
type what you think it is into translate google, and then listen to the audio to see if it sounds similar. This is totally free.
The direct translation is only free for the first time and for a limited number of seconds.
——————————————————————————A tribute to Lost Movies===My avatar: youtu.be/SdqsgEOBOlc——————————————————————————
[Image]
ferdi111
Posts: 926
Likes:
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:10 pm

Re: [REL] X (1986) directed by Oddvar Einarson

Post by ferdi111 »   0 likes

Ontopic: The movie is also available online https://adult.noodlemagazine.com/watch/ ... _172028893

Offtopic: About youtube autogenerated subs... it works on places where a character speaks English slow loud and clearly without background noise
Toast
Posts: 13
Likes:
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2022 4:35 pm

Re: [REL] X (1986) directed by Oddvar Einarson

Post by Toast »   2 likes

Here are some questions:
What does FLORA say after line 116, at 00:30:14,179 --> 00:30:16,580
"I don't want to go home"
???

"I can't do it." ("Jeg klarer det ikke.")
"Not those acid-freaks either." ("Ikke de syre-folka heller.")


What does FLORA say after line 208, at 00:50:16,246 --> 00:50:17,446
"Why so fast?"

"I'm loosing the clog." ("Jeg mister treskoen altså.")

A funny note on the "Why so fast?" line, she's actually saying "Skal du med hurtigtog eller?" ("Are you going by express train or what?")


What does FLORA say after line 256 at 01:01:18,875 --> 01:01:23,475
- I never liked this woman.
- You can throw it out.

It sounds like she says:
FLORA: Passer igjen?

"Doesn't it match?" ("Passer det ikke?")
User avatar
Night457
Global Moderator
Posts: 5221
Likes:
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2019 3:44 pm

Re: [REL] X (1986) directed by Oddvar Einarson

Post by Night457 »   6 likes

Thank you for the dialog additions, Toast, and welcome to FLM!

By my count we now have 3 versions of the English subtitles:
(1) Original created by Goldberger in August 2018 and reshared by ghost in January 2020 & February 2021.
(Ghost did not say if he did any corrections.)
(2) Revision by Ziggy Plock in February 2022.
(3) Further input by new member Toast in November 2022, included in Version 3 below:
X (1986).1080p.V3.srt
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
User avatar
ghost
Site Admin
Posts: 8460
Likes:
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2004 1:00 am

Re: [REL] X (1986) directed by Oddvar Einarson

Post by ghost »   0 likes

(Ghost did not say if he did any corrections.)
Nope. I considered them as final.

Thanks for the additions!
Post Reply