Tom Hanks disappointed with Apple TV+ 'Greyhound' release

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 80
    mknelsonmknelson Posts: 850member
    Beats said:

    "I don't mean to make angry my Apple overlords, but there is a difference in picture and sound quality," offers Hanks.


    Did Apple lower the quality? If so, this is completely unacceptable and reason for Apple users to boycott Apple TV+. This infuriates me.

    It's the nature of digital compression for streaming rather than anything deliberately malicious. Tom doesn't imply otherwise - he'd just prefer the higher fidelity you get from (an SSD?) for projection in the theatre.
    GeorgeBMacronn
  • Reply 42 of 80
     ;) After covid-19 a theatrical cut will do it. 
  • Reply 43 of 80
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 33,408member
    badmonk said:
    This is the reason, AppleTV has to stay away from mega-stars like Oprah, Hanks, Spielberg et. al. and to more hungry younger artists who are more dynamic and have vision like Boots Riley.  It’s this generation where more compelling art happens anyway.
    Boots Riley? He’s an avowed Marxist. If he walks the walk and talks the talk he should move to Cuba... you know, just one of the many countries where Marxism destroyed everything. Screw him and his collectivist propaganda.
    9secondkox2cat52
  • Reply 44 of 80
    BeatsBeats Posts: 2,560member
    mknelson said:
    Beats said:

    "I don't mean to make angry my Apple overlords, but there is a difference in picture and sound quality," offers Hanks.


    Did Apple lower the quality? If so, this is completely unacceptable and reason for Apple users to boycott Apple TV+. This infuriates me.

    It's the nature of digital compression for streaming rather than anything deliberately malicious. Tom doesn't imply otherwise - he'd just prefer the higher fidelity you get from (an SSD?) for projection in the theatre.

    What irks me is the content is 100% controlled by Apple. I would expect everything to stream as the original on my 4K Dolby Vision/Atmos Apple TV.

    If it's due to some mandatory compression then Tom is lying if he says he can see/hear a difference. If done intentionally that's a shi**y move by Apple and a way to waste millions on a movie only to cut the quality.
  • Reply 45 of 80
    tmaytmay Posts: 5,452member
    dewme said:
    I'm looking forward to this because of the compelling subject matter. I respect Tom Hanks and appreciate his abilities. but I'm pretty sure there are a plethora of aspiring actors who would have jumped at the opportunity to play the same role without feeling compelled to complain about the release not being "perfect." As a matter of fact, the sailors who were part of the Battle of the Atlantic were faced with a far more troubling state of imperfection while fighting a life and death battle with less than full appreciation from their fellow citizens since these battles occurred prior to the United State's declaration of war against the Axis powers. The sailors who died on the USS Reuben James DD-245 and mariners on merchant vessels during the Battle of the Atlantic would probably have a much different bar for establishing "disappointment" than does Tom Hanks. 
    I would be very interested in a feature film of the Battle Off Samar;

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_off_Samar

    which is about as epic a Naval battle as can be found in WWII.

  • Reply 46 of 80
    joogabahjoogabah Posts: 131member
    Xed said:
    larryjw said:
    mtriviso said:
    Sigh. Just open the movie theaters. There's nothing like watching a movie in a massive IMAX 3D theater. If people are frightened they might get the rona, then just stay at home. Please, just let the rest of us who are unafraid enjoy what our acting troupes have to offer in the milieu to which we have become accustomed. 
    Frightened? Maybe informed. My grandparents and parents were WWI and WWII generations. And I'm a boomer pre-vaccine and pre-antibiotics. We know disease and pandemics first hand. 

    In reviewing census data for genealogy I would run across families asked how many children did you have? 14. How many still living? 4. My grandparents lost young siblings  and cousins to disease. STDs were a big problem among girls and guys in uniform stateside during WWII -- my mother's job was to help treat them. So was TB -- sanitariums built across the nation to confine them. Nobody thought it was bravery to not care if you came down with these diseases. Certainly, there was sympathy sometimes, but getting sick and not pulling your weight was morally reprehensible. 

    Being brave by ignoring a disease. My father's WWII diary mentions some other GI's getting sick -- great way to stay behind for some R&R while others did the fighting for you. Malingering was a problem and pissed off others pulling their weight. 

    And I had the pleasure of contracting polio during the 50's epidemic. It was no fun. 

    So, coming down with Covid-19 when you are fortunate enough to be able to take precautions is really morally reprehensible -- not willing to pull your weight. 
    We’ve done such a great job of removing those health care issues that too many people (even many that lived through it) don’t believe they are real issues.

    This video explains very well how antivaxers think, which also covers a lot of the poor judgment with this pandemic.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzxr9FeZf1g
    I used to think like that.  Then one day I actually took the time to watch Vaxxed.  None of those people are "anti-vaxxers".  They're all parents of vaccine injured children, or in the case of Vaxxed II, people injured themselves.  The issue is vaccine safety, not the viability or usefulness of vaccines.  Look up Pluserix or Trivirex if you want to know what I mean.  So many people dog pile onto "anti-vaxxers" without watching or reading a single thing vaccine safety advocates say.  At present, pharmaceutical companies have no liability for vaccine injury, which is problematic.  The federal government pays all claims for legitimate injuries.  This is why a massive propaganda campaign was launched against anyone who tries to point out egregious harm - because Uncle Sam is on the hook for liability.  Even the CDC admits prior episodes of contamination where vaccines actually gave people the disease they were trying to prevent (in this case Polio):  https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history.html

    The safety threshold for vaccines is no where near as high as for other pharmaceuticals.  And they don't do double blind studies on effectiveness or safety with a control group that isn't vaccinated.  The political expediency of herd immunity means people have decided to sacrifice some minority for the whole, but that doesn't sit well when you or your kid is the one who is damaged permanently.  Let these people speak without ridiculing them blindly.
    cat52tobian
  • Reply 47 of 80
    BeatsBeats Posts: 2,560member
    He's crying that it isn't in theaters yet understands the importance of social distancing.

    "There's really only three things we can do in order to get to tomorrow. Wear a mask, social distance, wash our hands."

    https://consequenceofsound.net/2020/07/tom-hanks-mask-dont-be-a-pussy/

    I'm thinking he's just disappointed it didn't make a theatrical debut and not blaming Apple or complaining like articles are painting it to be.
    tmayronnbbh
  • Reply 48 of 80
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,322member
    What the fuck did Apple do to him? Why is he so vitriolic against them? ATV+ has shown itself to have better image quality/sound than pretty much every other streaming service out there, so that's the context he should be considering. Attacking it by comparing it so theatres is just absurd. What's the point of that comparison, and why attack Apple for it? Not Apple's fault that theatres were shut down. What a weird and misguided attack target. Also, he got paid millions for his role, so he should STFU already and take solace in that. 
    rossb2
  • Reply 49 of 80
    lineyliney Posts: 19member
    larryjw said:
    mtriviso said:
    Sigh. Just open the movie theaters. There's nothing like watching a movie in a massive IMAX 3D theater. If people are frightened they might get the rona, then just stay at home. Please, just let the rest of us who are unafraid enjoy what our acting troupes have to offer in the milieu to which we have become accustomed. 
    Frightened? Maybe informed. My grandparents and parents were WWI and WWII generations. And I'm a boomer pre-vaccine and pre-antibiotics. We know disease and pandemics first hand. 

    In reviewing census data for genealogy I would run across families asked how many children did you have? 14. How many still living? 4. My grandparents lost young siblings  and cousins to disease. STDs were a big problem among girls and guys in uniform stateside during WWII -- my mother's job was to help treat them. So was TB -- sanitariums built across the nation to confine them. Nobody thought it was bravery to not care if you came down with these diseases. Certainly, there was sympathy sometimes, but getting sick and not pulling your weight was morally reprehensible. 

    Being brave by ignoring a disease. My father's WWII diary mentions some other GI's getting sick -- great way to stay behind for some R&R while others did the fighting for you. Malingering was a problem and pissed off others pulling their weight. 

    And I had the pleasure of contracting polio during the 50's epidemic. It was no fun. 

    So, coming down with Covid-19 when you are fortunate enough to be able to take precautions is really morally reprehensible -- not willing to pull your weight. 
    I too am a pre-vaccine and pre-antibiotics boomer. Our only option was to get immune - by getting measles, mumps, and chickenpox. The killer is that damn chickenpox! It just sat there all those years until I got old, then afflicted me with shingles. A girl in the house across the street where I grew up got polio - my sympathies to you. I'm in Silicon Valley, born & bred, and we're staying on lock-down in our household.
    XedtmayGeorgeBMac
  • Reply 50 of 80
    thrangthrang Posts: 897member
    When the news of this first broke a month ago or whatever, the story indicated Hanks himself had to sign off on distributing through AppleTV. So...

    edited July 2020
  • Reply 51 of 80
    pbruttopbrutto Posts: 29member
    larryjw said:
    mtriviso said:
    Sigh. Just open the movie theaters. There's nothing like watching a movie in a massive IMAX 3D theater. If people are frightened they might get the rona, then just stay at home. Please, just let the rest of us who are unafraid enjoy what our acting troupes have to offer in the milieu to which we have become accustomed. 
    Frightened? Maybe informed. My grandparents and parents were WWI and WWII generations. And I'm a boomer pre-vaccine and pre-antibiotics. We know disease and pandemics first hand. 

    In reviewing census data for genealogy I would run across families asked how many children did you have? 14. How many still living? 4. My grandparents lost young siblings  and cousins to disease. STDs were a big problem among girls and guys in uniform stateside during WWII -- my mother's job was to help treat them. So was TB -- sanitariums built across the nation to confine them. Nobody thought it was bravery to not care if you came down with these diseases. Certainly, there was sympathy sometimes, but getting sick and not pulling your weight was morally reprehensible. 

    Being brave by ignoring a disease. My father's WWII diary mentions some other GI's getting sick -- great way to stay behind for some R&R while others did the fighting for you. Malingering was a problem and pissed off others pulling their weight. 

    And I had the pleasure of contracting polio during the 50's epidemic. It was no fun. 

    So, coming down with Covid-19 when you are fortunate enough to be able to take precautions is really morally reprehensible -- not willing to pull your weight. 
    Well written without being confrontational, informative, personal and sensible. I forgot I was on the internet for a moment, thanks for this!
    tmayGeorgeBMac
  • Reply 52 of 80
    iOS_Guy80iOS_Guy80 Posts: 543member
    It sounds like Mr. Hanks needs to upgrade his home theater system. Streamed movies look great at my house, and in some ways it’s better than the theater experience, although I still enjoy going out to the movies in less virulent times. 
    👍
  • Reply 53 of 80
    skingersskingers Posts: 24member
    The quality of picture and sound is quite dependant on the quality of sound and screen of your home theatre and the actual theatre you are comparing it with.  I've seen excellent examples of the former and terrible examples of the latter which narrows the gap considerably!
  • Reply 54 of 80
    crowley said:
    DAalseth said:
    Well, let’s be honest, he likes movies in theatres. He made it with a theatre in mind. Now it’s a direct to TV, a big step down.
    Suppose you wrote a book and discovered that it would only come out on Kindle.
    Suppose you baked a wedding cake, and discovered that the wedding was cancelled.
    Suppose you wrote a beautiful song, and discovered that your patron kept it for only themselves to listen to.
    Suppose you painted a beautiful picture and discovered that the person who bought it only wanted it for an investment so it would stay in a vault until it came time to sell.

    Hanks made this with the idea that crowds of people would be in a theatre enjoying it. Now yes lots of people will see it, but not the way he had in mind. I’d be disappointed too. 
    While that is true, life is full of disappointments. The reason this happened was due to the impact of COVID-19.

    And it is there that his frustration should be directed. 

    Instead, he fires shots at the saviors of his movie and even calls them names - like a child would do. 

    Everyone understands the pain of an artist creating a masterpiece only for it end up in the local museum rather than a major gallery.

    But it is what it is. Hanks is an old man. Old enough to know better. than to whine over something that he couldn't control - and certainly old enough to know better than to attack those who have rescued his sinking ship (pardon the pun).

    Be happy you made some coin, got to practice your craft, and though it wasn't presented the way you want, it's better than tanking entirely. 

    If ever there was a moment for the man to point out a life lesson in the current times, he not only missed it, but he let the opportunity turn into a childish rant that paints him as less of an industry icon than he is. 

    set your frustrations at the uncontrollable things in life - like COVID - or the fact that we had to be locked down as a result. But to fire shots at those who ensured your movie made money? Wow.

    time to grow up, Mr. Hanks. 
    Read the interview.  You've whined here about Hanks way more than Hanks talked about Apple.  It was a couple of sentences in a 30 paragraph interview that was explicitly to do with the purpose of him being interviewed - the film, and how it's being delivered. 

    Not a "rant", not an "attack" or a "shot", just a sadness about something that was close to his heart.  There's no need to be a prick about that.
    Dude. 

    Go back and read. 
    Dude doesn’t just air an overall frustration. He fires shots. 

    He calls them names. Like a child would do. 

    And he is doing it to people who HELPED to save his movie. If it wasn’t Apple, perhaps it would be Amazon, Netflix, etc. 

    sure, it’s a bummer for him. But his frustrations are misdirected. 

    Not really that difficult to understand. 

    Have a great day. 
    Xed
  • Reply 55 of 80
    The funny part is about movie theater quality vs home theater quality. 

    For the most part, my home theater quality blows away the movie theaters - outside of some that have newly upgraded to 4K projection or LED wall. Very rare. 

    A capable 4K tv is looking much better. 

    If he means the size and scale of the experience, then sure, a movie theater screen is huge. And the sound system likely better than my home theater. 

    But the visuals? Nope. Even with compression. 

  • Reply 56 of 80
    BeatsBeats Posts: 2,560member
    The funny part is about movie theater quality vs home theater quality. 

    For the most part, my home theater quality blows away the movie theaters - outside of some that have newly upgraded to 4K projection or LED wall. Very rare. 

    A capable 4K tv is looking much better. 

    If he means the size and scale of the experience, then sure, a movie theater screen is huge. And the sound system likely better than my home theater. 

    But the visuals? Nope. Even with compression. 


    If he's talking about theater quality then his comment can easily be misunderstood. He just mentioned quality. I read that as the quality of the original being lowered to save space or something.


    skingers said:
    The quality of picture and sound is quite dependant on the quality of sound and screen of your home theatre and the actual theatre you are comparing it with.  I've seen excellent examples of the former and terrible examples of the latter which narrows the gap considerably!
    It sounds like Mr. Hanks needs to upgrade his home theater system. Streamed movies look great at my house, and in some ways it’s better than the theater experience, although I still enjoy going out to the movies in less virulent times. 



    What is he viewing it on? His iPhone? I doubt this millionaire cannot afford a half-decent home theater.
  • Reply 57 of 80
    BeatsBeats Posts: 2,560member
    He’s gutted because he knows Apple TV+ Only has 5 paying subscribers. (And one of those is Cook)

    And 100 million+ trial subscribers. He should be grateful his movie launched during the first free year. It will get more views this way than the theater would have.
  • Reply 58 of 80
    gregalexandergregalexander Posts: 1,399member
    tmay said:
    Our state has averaged 1 community infection a day for the last week or two. The movie cinemas are open (with distancing) ... it wouldn’t be a bad idea to have some new release movies on offer instead of classics and repeats from Feb/March. 
    I'm curious as to which state you live in. 
    Sorry, NSW in Australia.  Population 7.5million with 1 community infection a day. The rest of our states are doing better (except Victoria).
    (The problems with international websites and unspecified countries!)

    Victoria (6 million) is going into a steep second wave but still only getting just over 100 new infections a day. They've been coming to NSW these school holidays so we may get a new start to infection here. 

    In any case, the cinemas automatically block out seats 1 around your group in every direction when you book. I have been considering seeing a movie since I have vouchers that will expire, but it's all repeats.
    edited July 2020
  • Reply 59 of 80
    gregalexandergregalexander Posts: 1,399member
    Beats said:
    He's crying that it isn't in theaters yet understands the importance of social distancing.

    "There's really only three things we can do in order to get to tomorrow. Wear a mask, social distance, wash our hands."

    https://consequenceofsound.net/2020/07/tom-hanks-mask-dont-be-a-pussy/

    I'm thinking he's just disappointed it didn't make a theatrical debut and not blaming Apple or complaining like articles are painting it to be.
    And if the numbers aren't too high, use a tracking app to assist the process of having you and others warned if you/they have come in contact with an infected person, so you can be extra careful of passing it on if you have got it but don't know it yet.
  • Reply 60 of 80
    gregalexandergregalexander Posts: 1,399member
    Apple could fix the quality issue by allowing users to pre-download (cache) the full quality movie to their devices before watching it. This is something that none of the streaming services provide. It is likely a dumb licensing restriction. 
    That's how Apple used to do it, the show was available in HD or SD, and wouldn't start playing until it had enough of a buffer that you could watch till the end in the quality you'd selected. When it estimated wrong, it would pause and wait again to get enough to make it through the rest of the way (or to try anyway). Also you could download on iTunes and play from there, downloading while at work or whatever.

    Then they followed Netflix's lead and instead of having the whole movie cached ahead they just dropped the resolution/quality if the connection wasn't fast enough.

    That's called "Quick start", and you can turn it off in the AppleTV settings. It downloads like it used to which allows people on slow connections to watch in full 1080p quality.

    BUT... just like you can't download 4K to iTunes, you can't turn off Quick start to download a 4K movie. The movie makers want to avoid 4K pirate copies. So it'll switch to 1080p. 
Sign In or Register to comment.