HarryTasker2525

Warbler said:

ricardo said:

During that stay in 2008, he told me he had cancer and showed me his paperwork from the Cancer Center in Tulsa (He moved there after leaving his home but prior to staying at my place).

According to Dayv, the cancer he had back in 2008 isn't the same cancer he has now.   He also said the cancer back in 2008 had been cured. 

PSYCHO_DAYV said:

Warbler said:

another thing: back in 2008, Dayv told me in an email that he had cancer and said he had told his ex about it(the one that is mother of his children).   You make recall about a week ago, Dayv posted about not being able to see his kids for Christmas.   I talked to him in pms about this and said that I couldn't believe his ex wouldn't allow him to see his children knowing that it might be his last Christmas.   He then told me that the ex didn't know about the cancer.   Either he lied to me in 2008 or he lied to me a week ago.

THAT WASN'T THE LUNG CANCER IN 2008.  THAT WAS THE SARCOMA OF THE SMALL INTESTINE.  THAT WAS CURED.

 

Lot of people are in bad financial situation this time of year. Yes I do donate thousands to charities as I always do near the holidays.

Where is concrete evidence Dayv is having cancer? I do not see this anywhere yet.

All The Beatles is songs I listed to. Few to list. Mostly from Yellow Submarine but these songs standing out.

All Together Now, Think for Yourself, Baby You're a Rich Man, When I'm Sixty-Four and Nowehere Man. Liking Yellow Submarine and Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band.

If he doesn't have cancer and is unwilling to scan documentation stating such, it should be bannable offense for lying, fraud and asking for donations.

If he in fact does submit correct proof of cancer to Jay and not give falsified claims, then everything okay. That means no very long story and very lot of scanned documents.

Is very untrustworthy for somebody who could be lying for this. For suggesting this thread should be locked until there is irrefutable proof from Dayv he does in fact have cancer.

Perhapsing more persons are far more trusting for people if they lie, or not, to get sympathy when otherwise people should have been more cautious in first place and investigated.

Sorry for long posting and English being second language.

Warbler said:

PSYCHO_DAYV said:

Warbler said:

another thing: back in 2008, Dayv told me in an email that he had cancer and said he had told his ex about it(the one that is mother of his children).   You make recall about a week ago, Dayv posted about not being able to see his kids for Christmas.   I talked to him in pms about this and said that I couldn't believe his ex wouldn't allow him to see his children knowing that it might be his last Christmas.   He then told me that the ex didn't know about the cancer.   Either he lied to me in 2008 or he lied to me a week ago.

THAT WASN'T THE LUNG CANCER IN 2008.  THAT WAS THE SARCOMA OF THE SMALL INTESTINE.  THAT WAS CURED.

it is curious that you never mentioned to me that the first cancer had gotten cured.    

oh well,  we'll just have to wait and see what Jay has to say.

 

My thinking is he could be very well lying about the whole situation and Jay might've called the authorities for fraud. Not exactly since this forum is in grey area. Dayv keeps changing his story and I do not believe him.

I do doubt his credibility until Jay has saying otherwise on matter. You will not get any money from somebody even as wealthy as myself since I am not so very gullible and needing evidence to corroborate the claim.

Sorry I do not feeling empathy in regarding the situation until further notification.

If Dayv was lying and commiting fraud, he should be banned.

I'm not lying when I say one of my cats needs some veterinary help for his medication but never would I con anyone out of their money as trivial as a break-up.

Perhaps he had needed money because of Seasonal Holidays were approaching? This greatly suspicious since he hasn't posted in thread since.

Dayv needs as much help as this guy.

This is last song I listened to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrdN6t_0rvQ

I am quite interested for On Her Majesty's Secret Service, GoldenEye, You Only Live Twice, The Living Daylights, A View to a Kill, Octopussy and The Spy Who Loved Me.

My collection has all of James Bond of currently released Blu-ray. What changes do these titles have on Laserdisc?

Wanting another True Lies movie instead of shit film such as Avatar. What the fuck happen?

nocomments87 said:

I actually have the 2002 DVD...while the colors do look a bit more natural, it's also a bit too bright and the contrast is way off. The cropping is normal, since the CE DVD is in its original 1.85:1 theatrical aspect ratio. The 2002 DVD has the 1.33:1 full frame, but open-matte print, and also an incorrectly framed 1.78:1 aspect ratio on the flip side. Of course, the best picture quality is on the Blu-ray, but it does have the same warmer colors that the CE DVD has and it's also the same 1.85:1 aspect ratio that the CE DVD has, since it's the same print. While not the best source for comparison, the 1989 VHS has the same warmer colors as the CE DVD and Blu-ray, so the colors on the 2002 DVD are off, if using that for a basis of judgment. If I knew anything about do-it-yourself color correcting, I'd try to match the 1.33:1 version to the CE DVD, and have the best of both worlds...

So is need to retinting Blu-ray release?

captainsolo said:

hairy hen said:

I was just thinking of watching GoldenEye recently.  Have heard good things about the DTS laserdisc, but never heard it for myself.

I have two dvd versions, the special edition release and the ultimate edition box sets that came out a few years ago.  The 'ultimate' version is actually nothing of the kind, because they screwed up the transfer by cropping the image too far and rendering it too dark, and the remixed audio has rather less LFE strength than the original, even though the sound quality is somewhat improved.  In both picture and sound it is simultaneously better and worse because of these things.  Overall I'll just stick with the older version; hopefully when they get around to doing the Bluray they'll re-do the transfer and go back to the original mix.

I watched the UE and noticed that the audio seemed a bit off. Glad to know I'm not the only one. I actually like some of the aesthetics of the new version (Darker colors, tighter framing) but don't think they are the original intent. The film plays better than I remember, but still not as good as it should have been. Also, the soundtrack really shows how Serra's score is undermixed.

bkev said:

The Man with the Golden Gun. Not the best, but I don't know if it quite qualifies as bad. There were some serious campy moments, but it was nice seeing Bond somewhat competent (compared to Live and Let Die, where he seemed to fall into every trap even remotely possible.)

Hey! Bond springs every trap in LALD. The Moore portrayal in both LALD and TMWTGG is a strong, rough, and devious eyebrow raiser. Neither film is bad and they certainly have their moments.

Hound of the Baskervilles-58 Hammer.

I am big fan of Hammer Productions. Seen movie you already mentioned and first two of their Dracula and Frankenstein films.

GoldenEye is originally 5.1 channel feature.

This image very helpful.

??????? from Andrei Tarkovsky

I cannot type Russian?