logo Sign In

captainsolo

User Group
Members
Join date
13-Mar-2009
Last activity
28-Apr-2025
Posts
3,017

Post History

Post
#455164
Topic
Last movie seen
Time

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.

Post
#455010
Topic
Info: James Bond - Laserdisc Preservations: 1962-1971
Time

The UEs suffered when compressed to DVD. The Blus typically reflect this and offer a better and more detailed color scheme. These HD masters would be used for new HD broadcasts and thus would explain this. I'd be surprised (and very glad) if they removed this tinkering because it was completely unnecessary.

bkev said:

my surround system isn't even set up properly! For aesthetic reasons we leave them in front with the others, our room just wouldn't work with them in the back.

I have to do the same do to lack of space. It looks funny.

Was just testing LTK on my setup last night (Dolby SR all the way!) and the rears are fine. I'd agree that it was most likely your cable.

Post
#454516
Topic
Last movie seen
Time

It worked and was interesting enough, but ultimately went nowhere. This disappointed me most.

I need to see more Tarkovsky. But his stuff really pales on home video. I can't tell you how glad I am that my first Solaris viewing was on 35mm.

TLD and LTK with the sound system. Dolby Stereo kicks major butt! Licence plays much better this way, although nothing can pull it out of its Miami Vice style.

Post
#454509
Topic
Star Wars coming to Blu Ray (UPDATE: August 30 2011, No! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!)
Time

SW on blu will sell like mad. It doesn't matter what version, because the general public will not care. "It's new, HQ, HD, and looks great! What's your problem?"

I used to have respect for the people of the New Hollywood. Then they got lobotomized and emasculated or burned out or destroyed.

I can understand people not wanting to bash GL for the fact that he did make these wonderful films. That was my mentality until the butchering of THX and the 3D plan.

Post
#454507
Topic
The unmasking of Vader and Richard Marquand
Time

I just think that Spielberg didn't want to do it (because it was SW, and that's George's and the fact that he was doing films back to back almost) and then there were the unions etc. It would have been similar to the way Jedi turned out anyway. He works best when under the gun and hasn't made anything really worthwhile since Empire of the Sun.

Lucas would have most likely acted the way he did on Raiders, as the producer.

Ford really has nothing to do in ROTJ and thus there really is little to go on. He had just come off Blade Runner and must have realized how little there was for him to do compared to Deckard's complexities. Everything ends to cleanly for my liking. ROTJ is just the nice little wrapped package. It's not at all bad, just disappointing when you really think about it.

And Han does come off as too soft. I guess the carbonite adds weight, age, and bitchiness.

Post
#454364
Topic
The Wittertainment Cinema Code of Conduct!
Time

I agree with everything but the eating part. I've recently switched to peppermints. They're like my crack because I always carry around 30 in my pocket. Plus it's cheaper than the old, burnt, tasteless $8 popcorn. The only problem is the noisy wrapper...especially in a silent movie.

I probably would have killed the person who dared do that in EWS. Now there's a movie that needs to be seen in Europe without an American audience! (alongside every other Kubrick film mostly. I did see 2001 here and that had people enraptured, but you simply don't mess with The Master's work.)

Post
#453629
Topic
Info: James Bond - Laserdisc Preservations: 1962-1971
Time

Doesn't it always...;)

I just won copies of TSWLM and YOLT from the 89 series on ebay but have to wait until the holidays to bring down my player...and probably will then need a remote...and more upgrades...

Keep the updates coming. This thread has encouraged me to finally start collecting all of the 007 LDs.

BTW how much is the jump in quality from the 89 series to the Connery Collection?