Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Didn't see a thread on this... anyone else catch this yet?

It's pretty entertaining DESPITE the terrible, awful, horrible, stupid decision/gimmick to include Deep Fakes of Al Davis and Pete Rozelle commenting on things throughout.

Seriously I don't understand why the hell they would decide to do this. But outside of that, it was very good. Would be one of the better overall 30 for 30s if not for that terrible gimmick.

Posted
19 hours ago, oSuJeff97 said:

Didn't see a thread on this... anyone else catch this yet?

It's pretty entertaining DESPITE the terrible, awful, horrible, stupid decision/gimmick to include Deep Fakes of Al Davis and Pete Rozelle commenting on things throughout.

Seriously I don't understand why the hell they would decide to do this. But outside of that, it was very good. Would be one of the better overall 30 for 30s if not for that terrible gimmick.

I read an interview with the director, he said they got the idea when they were not able to interview anyone (outside of zoom) for the doc and came up with this solution.  Not a great reason, but a reason nonetheless. They should of just shelved it for a year.

Posted
1 minute ago, Dr Fear said:

I read an interview with the director, he said they got the idea when they were not able to interview anyone (outside of zoom) for the doc and came up with this solution.  Not a great reason, but a reason nonetheless. They should of just shelved it for a year.

Hmmm yeah not sure if that's a great reason. Feels like they just wanted to "play" with Deep Fake.

Can you not just set up HD cameras on people and record them while asking questions remotely?  Seems like all of the time/expense/etc., involved in creating the Deep Fakes could have been used to gather some real interviews.

That said, I did still enjoy the doc overall... there's lots of great archival footage and it was fun to go through the story again, even though I remember most of it.

One thing that it really drives home and I had honestly kind of forgotten... you could argue that the Raiders were the best franchise in the NFL from, say, 1970-85.  The Steelers won more Super Bowls (4 vs. 3), but the Raiders were consistently better for longer.  

Posted

Caught a little bit of it last weekend when I was home. it looked to be pretty interesting so I'll have to check it out and it's entirety when I get a chance. Never cared much for Al Davis but it should make for an interesting watch.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...