Sign In

The Aluminum Falcon

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
Last activity

Post History

Bond Laserdisc Preservations: 1962-1971

Well, what do you know! Do you think they’re all SE-based, captainsolo? That cap of Thunderball certainly makes it seem the case for that particular film unless Lowry used the same element. OHMSS also has a hair on the left side of the 3rd frame (though admittedly that might not be frame exact).

I had an FRWL cap, but I dumped it because it looked Lowry, except with slight variations in the fleshtones.

Tell me, of course, if you want a closer look or scene-specific caps.

Bond Laserdisc Preservations: 1962-1971

SilverWook said:

Has any info ever come to light as to why TSWLM was remastered for Blu Ray, and the other films weren’t? The Lowry master didn’t seem to be the worst of the lot on the UE DVD releases.

Actually, the TSWLM Lowry master was pretty horrific and absolutely riddled with EE. I recall it being the only UE DVD that was definitively a downgrade from the earlier SE line.

Comparison here:

It’s shocking, however, that they could not also shell out for a new Goldeneye transfer or at least use the cropped (albeit good quality) Lowry version rather than resorting to an LD-era master!

On another note, as I mentioned before, I found some ancient 720p HDTV caps of Thunderball, You Only Live Twice, and On Her Majesty’s Secret Service predating the BDs on RuTracker a year back. Resolution is unfortunately not terribly good. Yet, the colors and contrast are different from both the BD and UE DVD. I suspect they’re the Lowry master without any release-specific tinkering.

Screencaps (3 for each film) can be seen in this photo album: James Bond

BD and UE DVD caps lifted from caps-a-holic and labeled as such in the corner. The HDTV stills have no letterbox bars. If you organize each movie’s sub-album by Filename, you should see the caps in the following order: BD - HDTV - SD DVD.

Batman V Superman: Dawn of the Edits

Saw the Ultimate Cut and still very much have grievances.

I’ve been tinkering with the already-released digital version and come up with TWO(!) slightly different edits. I didn’t want to change the film too much, as I wanted an edit that would still make sense with future movies (hence no, lopping off endings or leaving out too many subplots). To those hoping for a more radical change, both of these are, for better or worse, still Zack Snyder’s Batman v Superman. They are merely given another editing pass for clarity and cohesion.

Both of my edits are built on two chief premises:

  • Restructure the film (primarily in the first half) for better plot progression. As many here and elsewhere have complained, the movie, even in its Ultimate Cut iteration, feels quite disjointed and occasionally overwhelming, cutting between different characters that have not previously been established. By far the biggest change is pushing back the Africa sequences. The events of the last film are now the inciting incident and Africa serves as a so-called point of no return. Furthermore, now, we have an inkling that Lex Luthor is manipulating things behind the scenes already.

  • Omit certain sections in their entirety, including the Knightmare sequence, the future Flash cameo, and the murderous Batmobile chase. In cutting these, it helps bring back the notion of a Batman, who has become cruel but not outright homicidal. From interviews with Zack Snyder, it seems that an outright murderous Batman was not quite his intention.

The differences between my two edits (each running about 2 and a half hours) are as follows:

  1. Batman v. Superman - The Final Cut - the less radical of the two edits. This mainly focuses on the two goals above. Like the release cuts (theatrical and ultimate), Batman seems to be the de-facto protagonist, if there indeed is one. This was my first version, but, in my mind, it had one major issue that caused me to create the second version.

  2. Man of Tomorrow - this helps refocus the movie into an outright Man of Steel sequel. The only two storylines tracked in the first act are Superman (the clear protagonist) and Lex Luthor. Nonetheless, Batman’s spectre is felt. In a classic ploy to draw audience attention to a certain character (From Russia with Love/The Third Man), we keep hearing about Batman, but we don’t get to meet him until 23 minutes into the movie. This remedies my issue of how the released film efficiently set up Batman’s motivation, only to perplex audiences by seemingly ignoring the motivation and having Batman look for a “dirty bomb.”

If anyone’s interested in testing them and owns a copy, PM me. I definitely would like opinions on which of the two cuts work better. I’ll recreate the “winner” in full Blu-Ray when that release comes out.

Recreating Attack of the Clones: IMAX Experience

I believe the actual aspect ratio of the IMAX cut was 1.81 so using a 1.33 pan and scan (from HBO) wouldn’t be an exact recreation in terms of accuracy either. I think the instinct to keep the original aspect ratio is dead on in this case.

The other option would be to center crop to 1.81. With the admittedly lackluster compositions of the film, such a crop doesn’t actually do that much harm in practice.

Last movie seen

Our Kind of Traitor (2016)- First of all, I’ve never read the source novel, but this is certainly the worst film I’ve seen based off of le Carre’s work. The fantastic cast universally turns in bland performances, with Stellan Skarsgard being the sole exception. As the every-man protagonist, Ewan McGregor is underdeveloped, being nothing more than a profession and the sole character trait of being a well-meaning gentleman. Damian Lewis does his best Michael Caine as Harry Palmer impression, but lacks the necessary conviction or energy.

If I were to sum up the main problem, it is that the director seems to profoundly misunderstand the material. Visually, the film is not only aesthetically garish with oversaturated colors and high contrast but also woefully inappropriate for the material, making le Carre’s seemingly average and mundane world unnecessarily glib and stylish. Even if the camera stopped shaking once in a while, with a runtime of less than an hour and fifty minutes, the film rushes along at such a pace that the audience does not have time to absorb the characters enough to start to identify with them. Crucial moments of decision and emotion are glazed over.

The focus should have been on the intricacies of the characters, but the movie instead plays as a kinetic SparkNotes rendition of a complex plot with one-dimensional cutouts (save Mr. Skarsgard). Even the supposed emotional core of the movie, a troubled marriage, winds up utterly neglected, being “solved” in a throwaway line.

1.5 out of 4 stars.

Skip it. Just watch The Night Manager, infinitely superior in comparison, or any of the other titles I’ve mentioned above. If you want to see average tourists in Marrakesh get caught up in international intrigue, watch one of Alfred Hitchcock’s underrated classics, The Man Who Knew Too Much (1956).

DuracellEnergizer said:

I wish I had the patience and the right way with words to write reviews like these.

Thanks man! 😃

Man of Steel Spoiler Discussion

Really, there is a way to do a flawed, imperfect Superman (Byrne’s first Man of Steel issues showing the post-Crisis Superman’s formative years), but this just isn’t the character. You can have Superman making mistakes but in the end, he is the ideal towards which we strive (as the MOVIE ITSELF SAYS BUT DOES NOT SHOW). Even if the world is dark, Superman should show them the light rather than stoop to their level of anger (Smallville scene) or violence (neck break). His parents, normally essential to forming Superman’s heroic nature, are wasted in this film, with Costner’s diatribes coming across as truly confused.

While some may reasonably argue (and Zack Snyder even stated) that Zod’s death at the end was the key moment in which Superman learns the horror of taking a life, the opening of BVS shows this to be a fallacy. The VERY FIRST thing we see Superman do in the sequel is kill another guy, and, again, there are no ramifications in subsequent scenes.

All those so-called inspirational speeches fell flat to me because they were just words without actions to back them. Jor-El’s big speech at the Fortress, lifted verbatim from the magnificent All-Star Superman, didn’t have any resonance with a Superman, who didn’t seem particularly heroic. Even with all the obnoxiously on-the-nose savior/god imagery, I didn’t really see the example that the human race would supposedly follow. All words, no actions.

Worst of all, I just found the film horribly dull and boring! The action sequences just seemed endless, and I wasn’t sufficiently interested in the characters, none of which I found particularly charming or likable (despite the fact that the cast is filled with memorable actors). The cinematography was absolutely garish, horribly desaturated and filled with drab colors (even the BD copy). Shaky cam was employed too frequently. Never did we get a great, nice flying shot, which wasn’t either an extreme close-up or a long shot.

I daresay that I enjoyed BVS more than this because, though qualitatively worse with a muddied plot line, it was at least new and entertaining.

Honestly, the worst part of MOS was the writing.

Last movie seen

Went on a bit of a le Carre marathon:

The Spy Who Came in From the Cold (1965)- Tense and gloomy with a constant air of foreboding. Richard Burton is a wonder in this film, let loose playing a total wreck of a man. It’s probably the most nihilistic of any le Carre adaptation with a gut punch of an ending that’ll stick with you for days. 4 out of 4 stars.

The Deadly Affair (1966)- A bit of a boring(!) misfire even with a star-studded cast led by the inimitable James Mason. I’ve always appreciated Lumet’s films for their great acting and realism but never felt they were much more than the sum of their parts. 3 out of 4 stars.

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy (2011)- Admittedly, I have yet to see the original adaptation starring Alec Guiness, but my god is this a fantastic film, which I would go so far as to call one of the greatest of the decade. Gary Oldman nails Smiley, blending into the role effortlessly. But, the ensemble for this is equally amazing, without a single weak part in the whole film. I doubt we’ll ever get another production to unite all these wonderful talents! 4 out of 4 stars. My favorite of the bunch.

The Night Manager (2016)- A solid effort that’s not afraid to take liberties with the source material. Again, we have a perfect ensemble (with Tom Hollander being especially memorable). The direction is taut and suspenseful. Even the cinematography seems remarkable. Overall, I grow continually impressed with what they do with TV nowadays, often with a more careful eye and care than major motion pictures- both blockbuster and Oscar bait. It’s easy to see why John le Carre himself approved of this. 3.95 out of 4 stars with caveat below.

mild spoilers But, the protagonist’s motivation almost entirely rests on the “woman in a refrigerator trope” (a love interest is killed off in order to persuade the hero to act). I have no problem using tropes because often they are narratively effective/believable to an audience! I do take issue when a trope is thrown in, with little payoff in the story. In this case, the death of the female character was all but completely forgotten from episodes 2 to 5, with no sense of that being the protagonist’s main motivator.

I’m checking out Our Kind of Traitor, possibly as early as tomorrow, and look forward to seeing it.

To Live and Die in L.A. (1985): Opinions?

Thought I might as well start a discussion thread on the classic 1985 film, To Live and Die in L.A. I was just watching it and became eager to discuss with others. I believe there are fellow fans of the film on the board… captainsolo? 😃

In any case, everyone who hasn’t seen it should check out immediately. Normal revenge/crime film instead becomes a noir-esque character study with tense, suspenseful sequences and brilliant, visceral action scenes. Rarely are both character AND plot given such great attention. There’s one scene involving cop and criminal on the opposite sides of a single wall that is the definition of nail-biting. The movie really does explore the hellish soul-sucking void that is Los Angeles and the terribly unhealthy relationships, on which even the protagonist thrives. Trust is a commodity as counterfeit as the antagonists’ fake bills. The hellish, fiery finale, the culmination of all that is wrong with L.A., is truly something to behold. All the performances, from the undeniably underrated William Petersen to Willem Dafoe to Darlanne Fluegel to John Turturro, are magnificent. I do wish those first two got more juicy roles nowadays. Might be Friedkin’s masterpiece, even over The Exorcist. (For reference, I still need to check out The French Connection).

Oh and Wang Chung KILLS it with the score!

However, I’ve always had one problem with the movie…

SPOILERS (for a 31-year old film)
I admire the ending, but I hope fellow To Live and Die in L.A. fans will forgive me when I say that I don’t think the execution completely works. In fact, I actually PREFER the studio-mandated ending.

When Petersen’s character eventually tempts fate one too many time, Chance (get it?) is fatally shot in the face in a seemingly shocking moment. While I recognize why it might seem like a good idea to kill Chance (as, aside from taking many risks, he has done horrible things- led to the death of an FBI agent/blackmailed Darlanne Fluegel’s character, Ruth, for sex), I feel it is counter-intuitively the more “expected” outcome, particularly considering the title of “To Live and DIE in L.A.” But, for the plot to follow the expected outcome is not necessarily a bad thing in and of itself: what I really don’t like is how his death is essentially electing the traditional trope on the part of the story to “punish” the protagonist for his transgressions. In killing him, the movie follows traditional morality, eschewing something more innovative. I think a truly cynical and unique approach would have been to let him live, showing how, unlike traditional movies, amorality often goes relatively unpunished in noir city. Friedkin, in the featurette for the studio-mandated alternate ending, defends his killing of Chance as exposing how the random hand of fate; far from it, Friedkin actually affirms the notion of fate as NOT random but rather a deliberate moralizing force.

But, really, I would have been fine with all that, if not for that ending scene. Again, I GET what the movie was going for. Chance’s meek partner, John Vukovich, is almost “possessed” in a weird sense by Chance’s spirit, having learned that to live in L.A. he must be just as cruel. He takes Chance’s place, deciding to continue blackmailing Ruth for information and sex. It’s a lovely idea and an appropriate thematic conclusion to a movie about falseness, but where it fails for me is execution. Vukovich comes in with Chance’s demanding masculine swagger, garbed in a “cool” outfit that doesn’t fit in with any of the character’s previous attire. Moreover, he seems to be directed to not only act LIKE Chance but rather literally ape Petersen’s performance, discarding his normal character. As-is, Vukovich’s transformation is VERY literal and heavy-handed. In my opinion, the scene would have worked far better if, at the start of the scene, Vukovich seemed unchanged, only for it to become shockingly evident through his dialogue with Ruth that he has changed a great deal. Then, you have the dichotomy between an unthreatening, likeable exterior and secretively predatory actions, which, would seem to fit in with the movie’s theme better; in L.A., nothing is what it seems because the outside doesn’t match (rather than painfully highlighting) the inside. The flashbacks of Chance are also too on-the-nose.

In contrast, the studio ending, while a seemingly bad idea conceptually, is magnificently executed! There, Chance survives, and, alongside Vukovich, is discreetly transferred to L.A. On a sheerly visual level, the ice of Alaska makes a lovely contrast with the hellish heat (exposed especially in the fiery finale) of L.A. For reasons I more or less stated above, I like the notion that punishment eludes the two agents; the subversion of the title works to form a thematically fitting ending. The audience is left a little uneasy at the broken expectation that Chance doesn’t die after all his crimes; confusion gives way to understanding, as they realize that life doesn’t always punish the guilty like in the movies. It’s also VERY in keeping with theme that their chief, implied to have discovered all their actions, would simply deal with it under the table rather than jail them; in terms of superficial appearances, their transgressions, if exposed, might reflect badly on their chief, who publicly takes credit for the success of the case. The cherry on top is Chance’s wry smile, performed aptly be Petersen, as he realizes who betrayed him.

Sorry for the long rant but thought I had to admit that. Rarely do I find a studio-mandated ending, directly opposed by the director, to be more satisfying. Anyone else happen to agree… or vehemently disagree for that matter? 😉

Best Evil Dead movie?

Personally, I like Evil Dead the best. It’s got that lightning in a bottle feel of folks genuinely trying to make a harrowing horror movie and getting comedic undertones. Nothing is more horrifying to me in the trilogy than that initial Shelly dismemberment scene. Evil Dead is raw filmmaking at the hands of an extraordinary then-19 year old talent. In many ways, Evil Dead II is more refined, but, as a result, less visceral and spontaneous.

Of course, I still love the rest of the trilogy, as well as the Ash v. Evil Dead TV show.

Recreating Attack of the Clones: IMAX Experience

Hey, I know I’m late to the party, but I’m very excited to see this version recreated! Always thought it was a wonderfully brutal cut from all the stuff I’ve read.

brandynskywalker, just in case you’re still looking for a more detailed cut list, as you’re tweaking the final cut, here are 3 articles from 2002:


Note that a poster on DVDTalk at the time claimed the last one was not completely accurate. Take that one with a grain of salt.

Donner Cut Vs Lester Cut?

Both cuts are severely flawed. The Lester Cut, as others have mentioned, is the only one that feels like a polished high-budget movie, shot and completed in the 1980s.

The Donner Cut, however, still remains my preferred version. Though somewhat rough, it makes crucial changes.

  • Having the villains be released because of the missile from the first film gives his climactic turning back of time from the previous film necessary weight. Intentionally or not (more on that in a second), it retroactively justifies Jor-El’s warnings that such an act is forbidden and punishes Superman for his well-intentioned transgression. This is all undermined if the villains were released by a random bomb. That being said, the ending of the Donner Cut makes it seem as if the creators were unaware of this bit of subtext, as he does the same thing… Honestly, just leaving Lois knowing Superman’s secret identity would have been the best solution; as she outright states in a beautifully heartbreaking scene, she’ll keep his secret.
  • Marlon Brando being back thematically continues the first film (Father becomes the son).
  • Gene Hackman is Lex Luthor for the entire film and not some painfully obvious stand-in, who is dubbed in a way that is equally painful and obvious.
  • No random Kryptonian powers (except for turning back time).
  • Much of the goofy humor inserted by Lester is thankfully excised, making Zod and his followers far more threatening.
  • Donner just seems a superior director of actors for the material, though, in fairness, Lester was just dropped in a production that had already spiraled out of control. But, just watch the balcony scene between Lois and Superman near the end of the Donner Cut and tell me the Lester Cut has any fresh scenes directed remotely to that level of quality.

Of course, the Donner Cut does suffer from the awkwardly written and shot Blank Bullets reveal scene (which somehow manages to be weaker than the middling Pink Bear scene with its half-assed psycho-babble), an overall weaker score with reused John Williams music, and subpar, underfunded early 2000s CGI Special Effects. The BD transfer, taken from the 2006 HD master, is undeniably weak in contrast, color, and detail; the newly minted transfer of the theatrical cut wipes the floor with it.

Honestly, the best version I’ve seen is Booshman’s. It thoroughly mixes the two cuts to create a satisfying hybrid. Clearly, Booshman knows the movie very well, in order to choose exactly t The only drawbacks are a few overt digital effects, which, though well-intentioned, do stand out. Additionally, video quality, while nice for the time, is left somewhat weak looking because it was culled from the SD version of the weak Donner Cut master and the aged theatrical cut DVD.

Luckily, Booshman is working on a new HD Version that I have no doubt will be absolutely remarkable. His new special effects integrate more seamlessly than his old ones. It will be a great day when that version of Superman II is finally released.

Alien Trilogy: Custom Cuts - Do-It-Yourself Guide

Hi all! I know I’m a day late for this, but, if you’re still in the mood after Alien Day, then here’s options for a new way of watching the big three. This “preservation,” as stated in the thread title, can be recreated on your own computer, provided you get the original Blu-Ray files/structure (BDMV/Certificate) copied onto your hard drive.

To my knowledge, this possibility hasn’t been discussed before, but, because the official Blu-Rays rely on seamless-branching, you can quite easily use a program like TSMuxer to play the various M2TS files in whatever unique order you specify. You will, of course, lose menu capability, instead producing a 1080p BD Remux of your custom cut. I have not tried to, as of yet, but there’s no reason why you shouldn’t be able to burn the final result onto a disc and play on your home theater system.

Anyway, here are the instructions:

  1. Rip the Blu-Ray files, untouched, onto your computer. There are various ways how to do this, so I’ll not delve into specifics here.

That being said, you shouldn’t use a program like MakeMKV, which though handy, would result in one single MKV file that is unsuitable for our purposes. Similarly, don’t try to obtain some sort of “BD Remux” as this already has the seamless branching disabled and all the disparate parts assembled together in a fixed order.

You can confirm that you’ve successfully obtained the original Blu-Ray files if the folder STREAM (found: BDMV -> STREAM) has multiple items, none of which are too big in size, and not just one big 20 GB+/30 GB+ file like most BD discs.

  1. Once you have all the Blu-Ray files in their original structure on your computer, open up the program TSMuxer (downloadable here:

  2. Here is where the process gets specific to each movie:

—Alien- The Extended Edition—

This version of Alien basically takes the theatrical cut but reinserts the main deleted scenes (Signal Deciphering/Lambert Med. Fight/Dallas Cocoon) found in the otherwise shorter director’s cut. It’s not meant as an improvement on the perfect theatrical cut, as much as a supplement to those who want a deeper Alien experience.

Because this version is dependent on where the BD authors at Fox chose to set the branch point, it is not as long, as say, the Extended Edition fan edit on the unofficial Alien Appendix Disc 2. Regardless, this version is much higher video quality, as it is lossless from the BD with no re-encoding.

It comes in at 120 minutes and 39 seconds.

Open the STREAM folder (BDMV -> STREAM) and then drag the file 00983.m2ts into TSMuxer. Alternatively, you could press “add” on the right of TSMuxer and then select the file in the resulting finder window. These are the first few minutes of the film.

Leave everything as-is (983 in the Input Files window should be automatically highlighted), then simply click “join” on the right of TS Muxer, in between “add” and “remove.” In the resulting finder window, go back into the STREAM folder (BDMV -> STREAM) then select 00985.m2ts.

00985.m2ts should appear in your Input Files window joined (indicated by “++”) to 00983.m2ts. Now, 985 should be automatically highlighted. As before, leave it as such. From here on out, you just need to keep using the “join” function to assemble the whole movie from start to finish, taking all the various parts and branching them into a unique order.

The final file order for Alien (quite long) can be found on a .pdf file on MEGA located here-!yFlTSYrL!LnoKReBbcOJMABzXcFG54oMV3MQExYKVxfqIMnkC7mI

—Aliens- CBS TV Cut—

This version of Aliens is a recreation of the extended CBS TV cut, in which much of the footage (the holodeck park/“You mean dead”/sentry guns/Dwayne-Ellen exchange) later seen in the “Special Edition” first debuted. Yet, because it doesn’t have all the “Special Edition” footage (Hudson bragging/bee analogy/the much reviled suspense-ruining “Shake and Bake” colony sequence), it keeps up a much tighter pace without losing the emotional gravitas of the “Special Edition.”

For me, previously an advocate of the “Special Edition,” this is truly the best of both worlds. On another forum, it has been even suggested that this version most closely represented the version that Cameron wanted released in cinemas in 1986 before the studio cut it down. I choose to believe that theory. Some of the “Special Edition” footage was then simply added when Cameron then had carte blanche to include everything; like his cut of Terminator 2, too much added material winds up over-bloating the movie.

Needless to say, this doesn’t have the censorship of the CBS TV Cut.

Kudos to PDB and Stamper, whose description of this alternate cut on another forum, I followed, when assembling this edit.

It comes in at 143 minutes and 57 seconds.

Open the STREAM folder (BDMV -> STREAM) and then drag the file 01106.m2ts into TSMuxer. Alternatively, you could press “add” on the right of TSMuxer and then select the file in the resulting finder window. These are the first few minutes of the film.

Leave everything as-is (1106 in the Input Files window should be automatically highlighted), then simply click “join” on the right of TS Muxer, in between “add” and “remove.” In the resulting finder window, go back into the STREAM folder (BDMV -> STREAM) then select 01107.m2ts.

01107.m2ts should appear in your Input Files window joined (indicated by “++”) to 01106.m2ts. Now, 1107 should be automatically highlighted. As before, leave it as such. From here on out, you just need to keep using the “join” function to assemble the whole movie from start to finish, taking all the various parts and branching them into a unique order.

The final file order for Aliens (quite long) can be found on a .pdf file on MEGA located here-!WVdSkJKC!XvAoxnO5mxNy1Tha_xrilRtSSiJiVSwV-PCgl3R2XqY

—Alien 3- Hybrid Cut—

This version of Alien 3 is more or less the Appendix cut. It simply reverts it so that the alien burst out of a dog, as in the theatrical, as opposed to an ox.

That being said, I did keep the Appendix Cut opening sequence where Clemens finds Ripley while wandering alone, as it’s just infinitely more lively than the alternative in the theatrical cut. I question if the scene from the theatrical cut, with its bland lighting and low-energy acting, was not shot by David Fincher. The obvious drawback is that the dog is not explicitly shown at the crash site, but I think you can leave it for the viewer’s imagination.

Unfortunately, I have to note that this is the discs where the seamless branch points at Fox started to work against me. In reinstating the dog footage, I had to choose to forego some other extended footage, namely the sequence where Clemens asks Ripley if Newt is her daughter and Dillion berates the other inmates for mocking Golic. Furthermore, had I kept the theatrical discovery of Ripley (which I dislike for reasons discussed above), then I would have to leave out footage establishing the religious order of the prison, as well as the Company sending a communication.

I did not restore the theatrical ending, with the Alien actually bursting out of Ripley, as I agree with David Fincher and Sigourney Weaver that it’s a bit too over-the-top. However, I did include an alternate branching order if you wanted to keep it in.

It comes in at 140 minutes and 8 seconds.

Open the STREAM folder (BDMV -> STREAM) and then drag the file 00750.m2ts into TSMuxer. Alternatively, you could press “add” on the right of TSMuxer and then select the file in the resulting finder window. These are the first few minutes of the film.

Leave everything as-is (750 in the Input Files window should be automatically highlighted), then simply click “join” on the right of TS Muxer, in between “add” and “remove.” In the resulting finder window, go back into the STREAM folder (BDMV -> STREAM) then select 00752.m2ts

00752.m2ts should appear in your Input Files window joined (indicated by “++”) to 00750.m2ts. Now, 752 should be automatically highlighted. As before, leave it as such. From here on out, you just need to keep using the “join” function to assemble the whole movie from start to finish, taking all the various parts and branching them into a unique order.

The final file order for Alien 3 (quite long) can be found on a .pdf file on MEGA located here-!aM8RiBoI!vA2vb0h6hzWyki0lJ49stpXx8V11mbCkmOQUisMWtOo

If you want, the alternate file order with the theatrical chest-burster ending, it’s here-!SYMBwADC!qh14V2Nyq0CJ4ZXz_IzRm1xc5i8tdYTQ83kyjz8OitA

  1. Now, the process becomes the same, regardless of what disc you’re working on. (Note that you need to assemble these discs one at a time; you can’t make all three in just one window of TSMuxer.)

Anyway, simply select in the Output Window: “Blu-Ray ISO” or “Blu-Ray Folder,” depending on your preference. Alternatively, if you’re just using it on a computer, you could even just assemble an M2TS file.

Then specify a file name and location in the bar: Folder.

If it suits you, remove any extra tracks (eg. ukranian subtitles) in the “Tracks” window that you do not need. This would only be to save space for the eventual file.

Press “Start muxing” down below and then your custom BD will start being built.

  1. After this, you should end up with custom cuts in a BD structure, for each movie! What’s lovely about doing it this way is that there is no re-encoding whatsoever from the original BD, so you keep 100% HD and audio quality. Furthermore, this can be easily done without the aid of HD editing software.

I have not yet tried burning these versions, but I see no reason why they shouldn’t work.

If this guide is somehow confusing, don’t hesitate to post a reply, and I’ll try to clarify anything I’ve said.

Batman vs Superman: DOJ thread? (contains spoilers)

Structurally, it really is all over the place, with some scene-to-scene transitions feeling totally strange. Story is a total mess.

Yet, I do feel the ingredients for a decent movie are there, especially when one factors in the 30 minutes of deleted footage coming to Blu-Ray.

Unlike a lot of movies, including Superman Returns and Man of Steel, I do feel that this could be truly saved with a precise fan edit. Scenes should start too early and end too late, while some sequences seem completely out of place (Darkseid vision? “Do You Bleed” confrontation?). Look forward to seeing improved fan versions in the future.

Ranking the Star Trek films (and/or series')


  1. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
  2. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
  3. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
  4. Star Trek '09
  5. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
  6. Star Trek: The Motion Picture
  7. Star Trek Into Darkness
  8. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
  9. Star Trek: Generations
  10. Star Trek: Nemesis
  11. Star Trek: First Contact
  12. Star Trek: Insurrection


  1. TOS
  2. TNG
  3. DS9
  4. TAS
  5. VOY
  6. ENT