Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Browse by Decade
Amazonian
Advertisements

Advertisements

Search
Advertisements

Amazon Fun

Navigation
« 2000 A.D. (Part 3, 1990) | Main | Paleo-Future Online Store »
Tuesday
Dec182007

1999 A.D. Controversy

Back in April, I started posting clips from the 1967 film 1999 A.D. I never expected controversy. The video below should hopefully clear things up. Many thanks to Skip at A/V Geeks for the link.

There is a fair amount of skepticism from people questioning the authenticity of material I post here on the blog. Oddly enough, people tend to question the posts of microfilm scans rather than articles I've transcribed.

See also:
1999 A.D. (1967)
Online Shopping (1967)
1999 A.D. Intro (1967)

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

References (1)

References allow you to track sources for this article, as well as articles that were written in response to this article.

Reader Comments (9)

That's odd, about folks thinking it was fake. Maybe I'm gullible -- but I never suspected that, and I'd like like to think I'm not someone who's too completely lacking in the Savvy Dept.

On a related note, watched the "cult" film Queen of Outer Space recently -- 1958, stars Zsa Zsa Gabor as an alien (yeah, this is why it gets into 'cult' territory). There is a machine in the film that looks almost exactly like an iMac. I'll try to get a screen cap.

December 18, 2007 | Unregistered CommenterOliver / Cultpunk

Hey, that's Paul Magers from KARE 11 in the Twin Cities. He's on CBS in LA now. He's the best news anchor St.Paul/MPLS ever had. They've gone through two other anchors and they both stink.

December 18, 2007 | Unregistered CommenterJay

That Ladies' Home Journal article with all the predictions about giant fruit got some play on blogs a while back (in a textual transcription, not the scan of the original that you had). Some people who read it thought that it was probably fake, because a few of the non-giant-fruit-related predictions seemed too on the nose. But my impression was that they weren't too far out of line from what others were saying at the time.

December 18, 2007 | Unregistered CommenterMatthew

...In general, I've found that old futurist predictions about communication technology tend to be way, way more accurate than old futurist predictions concerning just about anything else. I mean, sure, we don't wear the "ristos" on our wrists, but that's just an industrial design detail.

December 18, 2007 | Unregistered CommenterMatthew

A video, today, talking about a video, of yesterday, that talked about life, today.

Retro futurism is becoming complex.

December 19, 2007 | Unregistered CommenterTimb

It couldn't possibly a fake because fakes of this nature always FEEL like fakes. Something always gives it away. The over the top "poor" sound quality, the too-much grain and video degradation, the contemporary fabric ir lamp they had to make do with because they couldn't find just the right item in the retro shop. And so on.

Look at Tarantino's recent valiant attempt to meticulously replicate the look of Grindhouse movies in Deathproof and Planet Terror. If even he can't perfectly pull it off...

December 19, 2007 | Unregistered CommenterChris

In agreement with Chris's post first and foremost, the look and feel of it is often a dead give away whether or not it is a genuine retro item. This is especially true when attempting to reproduce degraded old film. There is a reason it's hard to do. The effects of true aging, plus antiquated audio equipment and old style analogue recording has a high threshold of chaos mathematics for the grain, canning/distortion of the audio, etc.

Attempting to reproduce these without actually using said equipment and allowing the film to sit and decay for eons requires some pretty fancy digital filters. The problem with these digital filters is they are too perfect. The randomness of film grain, as he pointed out, is actually impossible to perfectly reproduce digitally because nothing on a circuit board can possibly be truly random. Even in programming where you can use functions like Int(RND * Number) to generate a random number, it's not really random.

To the subconscious eye, if one has seen at least a small amount of genuine old media like what they are trying to recreate, this flaw makes itself known.

Similarly, scans of old microfilm, aged paper documents etc. have the same principle behind them. So ultimately, a hoax is obvious to anyone who has seen genuine artifacts of similar context, whether they are experts at all or not in such things.

This fact alone, to anyone who's seen old microfilm, old film, and having heard old audio, proves that Mr. Novak's offerings are definitely genuine. Questioning their legitimacy is absurd!

August 28, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterDefautlicus

Spreety TV Online recently interviewed Wink Martindale, and discussed 1999 A.D.

The interview is found at http://www.spreety.com/Articles/Articles-Wink-Online.aspx.

A couple comments from Wink that did not make the article. They are:

* There was a bit of surprise that the ironing in the closet idea did not come to fruition.
* As for future (2029), Wink predicts ubiquitous light, hand held computer screens.

One more note, Wink is a true gentleman. It was a pleasure to listen to him.

September 29, 2009 | Unregistered CommenterSpreety TV Online

It is unquestionably authentic. I remember seeing this film in 1967 when I was in grade school. It left an impression on me then. Now through the magic of technology, I'm able to see it once again. The most memorable parts to me were the brief shot of the "air car" at the beginning and the falsetto latin singer in 3d at the house party.

April 24, 2010 | Unregistered Commentervelorutionist

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>