Random Comments

[Caya]

@Carol the Dabbler: Iirc it was a spontaneous idea, and she wanted something sounding "eternal" - you know, the old "quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum videtur" (whatever is said in Latin appears profound).

[Carol the Dabbler]

5 hours ago, Caya said:

... it was a spontaneous idea, and she wanted something sounding "eternal" - you know, the old "quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum videtur" (whatever is said in Latin appears profound).

Ah, something like those ipso-facto cool Japanese t-shirts in quasi-English, then (and I just realized I've used Latin twice in that sentence).  She should have asked for the translation on a card to carry in her wallet -- you can't have been the first one to ask! 

[J.P.]

So, to celebrate 5th anniversary of my first encounter with Sherlock I rewatched the whole series.
I still love the same things I loved and hate the same things I hated. What I miss is the emotional state that made me stay glued to the screen. The fate of a scanner-personality maybe.
I still love TAB the most, even if it's not really the version of Sherlock (as a person) that made me love the series. It must be the "parallel universes" thing, the fact that Sherlock used trance sessions to access deeper levels of his mind - something I always thought his Mind Palace excursions were anyway. The entangled lines of different realities, the idea of being written into live, not knowing, if it's the canon Holmes imagining the XXI version of himself or the other way round. Still think the League of Furies idea a bit stupid though. And I grieve all the unsaid hints and promises I thought it contained.
Still don't like S4, hate the beginning of 6 Thatchers, and Culverton Smith as a villain, and Eurus, but I think I made my peace with the "humanization" process of Sherlock. Still miss a resolution for Molly. And still cry at the end.

PS: did I mention that it's also the music that seemed to change in S4? It's much less of the "Hungarian Theme" as I call it, because the instrumentation reminds me of Hungarian folk music, and more different themes that may, or may not be Mary's and Eurus'.
Need to listen to the soundtrack.

[Arcadia]

14 minutes ago, J.P. said:

So, to celebrate 5th anniversary of my first encounter with Sherlock I rewatched the whole series.

This is quite a good idea, I haven't watched any of it since …. well, since the last season aired, I guess. I bought the DVD's but I'm not sure I ever even opened them. I guess I must have, I seem to remember becoming sort of resigned to T6T after extra viewings. Be interesting to see if I hate it as much now as I did then, and if I miss the rest of the show as much.

I've become obsessed with something else from my past (not a TV show) which I will not name for fear of ridicule   -- and I'm pleased to find that I'm enjoying it as much or even more now than I did then. Wouldn't it be nice if Sherlock turned out to be the same kind of thing?  

[J.P.]

Some old obsessions come back (but not without reason) and some only leave holes in your budget.
I'm felting now and try to come back to my dolls, but it's not THAT. I probably should use the time to get things done in the RL, because when I'm high on dopamine I don't have either time nor extra energy.

[Caya]

1 hour ago, Arcadia said:

I've become obsessed with something else from my past (not a TV show) which I will not name for fear of ridicule  

Happy holidays from a 48-year-old woman who's really looking forward to Disney Day coming up on TV. Never apologize for the things you love.

[Carol the Dabbler]

2 hours ago, J.P. said:

Still don't like S4, hate the beginning of 6 Thatchers, and Culverton Smith as a villain, and Eurus, but I think I made my peace with the "humanization" process of Sherlock.

That's about where I stand too.  Well, I thought the ginger nuts scene was kinda cute, but the rest of what you said, yeah.

Still hoping that when Moftisses say Sherlock has now matured into being the classic Sherlock Holmes, that means they will eventually be ready to do some more actual cases (like the first two series, but with a grown-up Sherlock).

[J.P.]

I thought the ginger nuts were ridiculous. The scene could be funny, but it was far too much out of character for both Holmeses IMO.

[Arcadia]

2 hours ago, J.P. said:

I thought the ginger nuts were ridiculous. The scene could be funny, but it was far too much out of character for both Holmeses IMO.

Yeppp. 

[Sheerluck]

16 hours ago, Caya said:

Happy holidays from a 48-year-old woman who's really looking forward to Disney Day coming up on TV. Never apologize for the things you love.

What's Disney Day?

[Sheerluck]

5 hours ago, J.P. said:

I thought the ginger nuts were ridiculous. The scene could be funny, but it was far too much out of character for both Holmeses IMO.

While I agree it's completely out of character for Holmes I must confess to enjoying the reference because I adore ginger nuts as well. 🤷‍♂️

[Caya]

49 minutes ago, Sheerluck said:

What's Disney Day?

Sorry, I only found German links, but basically, a TV station that's broadcasting Disney movies all day long, "from Aladdin to Zoomania" as they call it, on New Year's Day. Especially looking forward to the Pixar stuff.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Any of the classic stuff -- the hand-drawn animation?

[Caya]

Unfortunately, only after a fashion.

 

I have my favourite classics on DVD or Blu-Ray anyway, though, so there's that.

[Carol the Dabbler]

Goodness, that looks like pre-classic Disney -- not too long after Steamboat Willie?  Lemme check:  Yup, the very first Mickey Mouse cartoon, Steamboat Willie (video at that link), in 1928 and Springtime in 1929.  Mickey had not yet matured into the character that any of us recall from our childhood.

[Artemis]

On 12/27/2019 at 5:34 PM, Arcadia said:

I've become obsessed with something else from my past (not a TV show) which I will not name for fear of ridicule  

That's me all the time, lol.  Enjoy!

 

[Arcadia]

On 12/28/2019 at 5:45 PM, Carol the Dabbler said:

Any of the classic stuff -- the hand-drawn animation?

If they're actually showing Aladdin, yes. (Although I believe there was some CGI in the effects, at least.)

22 hours ago, Carol the Dabbler said:

Goodness, that looks like pre-classic Disney -- not too long after Steamboat Willie?  Lemme check:  Yup, the very first Mickey Mouse cartoon, Steamboat Willie (video at that link), in 1928 and Springtime in 1929.  Mickey had not yet matured into the character that any of us recall from our childhood.

Er, nope. Something about the style of that cartoon made me suspicious; for one thing, that is NOT how the early Mickey looked, for another, it's in color, and for one more … the animation is too … something. I'm not sure what it is -- it's both overly simple and too fluid. So I looked it up; it was released in 2018.  https://disney.fandom.com/wiki/Springtime_(Mickey_Mouse)

There is a 1929 cartoon with the same name; it doesn't have Mickey and looks like this: 

I can't see Disney going back to the very labor intensive days of cel animation, so I suspect the current version is also some sort of CGI. Those backgrounds, for instance; they're meant to look like watercolor, but if they ever were (which I doubt), they've been highly processed since. And the animation just doesn't feel hand-drawn to me, I can't explain it.

I have mixed feelings about this. I'm all for bringing back a more hand-drawn look, but the characters in this particular piece look too … cartoony.  

Just checked; Disney's first cartoon in color wasn't until 1932. And it's still more sophisticated than the one they made last year. And I figured out why. Let's see if anyone else notices what I noticed (and I'm referring to the animation, not story/song/etc.) There's probably more than one thing, but something in particular jumped out at me from the first frame.

 

 

[Carol the Dabbler]

36 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

I looked it up; it was released in 2018.

I saw that copyright notice, but there were credits for something along the line of "cleanup," so I assumed that it was a remastered -- and colorized? -- oldie.  I agree it's not quite the "Steamboat Willie" Mickey, but to me it looks way older than what I grew up with.  Maybe they were imitating a slightly post-Willie style?

[Carol the Dabbler]

50 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

Disney's first cartoon in color wasn't until 1932. And it's still more sophisticated than the one they made last year. And I figured out why. Let's see if anyone else notices what I noticed (and I'm referring to the animation, not story/song/etc.) There's probably more than one thing, but something in particular jumped out at me from the first frame.

I'm no artist, but I like that one a whole lot better than the one with Mickey.  They're both whimsical, but the '32 one is more graceful -- kinda like Fantasia.  I seriously doubt that's what you're referring to, though.  What did you have in mind?

[Arcadia]

3 hours ago, Carol the Dabbler said:

I saw that copyright notice, but there were credits for something along the line of "cleanup," so I assumed that it was a remastered -- and colorized? -- oldie.  I agree it's not quite the "Steamboat Willie" Mickey, but to me it looks way older than what I grew up with.  Maybe they were imitating a slightly post-Willie style?

Mmmm…. to me, Steamboat Willie looks very different. Longer nose, fatter bottom. Different lips. Less anatomically correct. My general impression is that they were trying to come up with a 21st century version … some of the other characters remind me more of My Little Pony and that ilk than anything Disney ever did.

 

3 hours ago, Carol the Dabbler said:

I'm no artist, but I like that one a whole lot better than the one with Mickey.  They're both whimsical, but the '32 one is more graceful -- kinda like Fantasia.  I seriously doubt that's what you're referring to, though.  What did you have in mind?

No, that's not what I'm referring to, but your observation is spot on. It's just better animation, period. Probably a higher frame rate, for one thing. And it's hand drawn, which gives it what we arty types call warmth. 

I'll wait and see if anyone else (all three of you ) sees what I'm referring to.

[Caya]

Only thing that I noticed is that, to me, it looks like Disney wasn't using the multiplane camera yet back then. Also, I'm impressed by the level of details an artist like you can glean - I just like the pretty moving pictures.

As for Aladdin, alas, it's the new (live-action) one, I think; and yes, afaik they were using CGI as early as Beauty (even though they then hand-painted and the computer stuff was only used for reference).

[Arcadia]

Also an excellent observation! Disney didn't start using the multiplane until a year or two later. Still not what I'm looking for, but this is fun, noticing all the little differences that add up to a big difference. The thing I noticed probably won't seem like much by the time we get through this.  

I took a course in animation and have some fabulous reference books, which I have mostly read and also, probably, mostly forgotten. But it remains an intense interest. To me, hand-drawn animation is the closest thing to real magic I'm ever likely to encounter. I've enjoyed many of the CGI cartoons, but they don't have the magic that hand-drawn has.

Any more guesses?

[kimber8ada]

I don't have any artist's eye for details but I noticed the faces on the black eyed Susan's. Maybe it's the tense times we live in but that for some reason that jumped out at me. Not sure "blackface" would be used now. And I agree the animation has a beautiful flow to it.

[Caya]

I watched it another time - do you mean that the 1932 animation mimics three dimensions by shading the chars and trees and such, while the 2018 one is unapologetically two dimensional?

Btw, Disney still makes occasional forays into traditional animation. Enchanted, for instance - admittedly the Andalasia sequences aren't that long, but still.

[Carol the Dabbler]

12 hours ago, Caya said:

... afaik they were using CGI as early as Beauty (even though they then hand-painted and the computer stuff was only used for reference).

Yup, Beauty was advertised as the first(?) animation to use computers.  And I must say the level of realism was considerably higher than even the classic Disney stuff -- round things looked really, really round, for example, though of course that can also be done by hand (there was one painter, whose name I never can recall, who somehow made round things look even rounder than round).