Originally Posted by raoul_duke /forum/post/14160505
Welcome to two months ago... Or was it longer?
Originally Posted by Cliff Stephenson /forum/post/13525928
Before people complain about how a title looks, it's probably a good idea that they understand how it is SUPPOSED to look and WHY.
Predator has a long back story related to the post-production of the film. The final editor was, in fact, not the credited editor. After some pretty rough and unimpressive cuts, an uncredited editor (who happened to later become a pretty decent director) was brought on to try and fix what wasn't working. In all this work, there were a lot of editorial tricks that were employed to finish that film. Shots were flopped, wide shots were zoomed to create mediums, medium shots were zoomed to create close ups. These tricks contribute to the look of Predator and although I haven't seen the disc yet, I am confident that the BD is representative of this look. This is one of the big problems I have with the tier thread... you have a bunch of guys all judging quality based not on what something should look like, but rather on what they ASSUME it should look like.