Go Back   Forums @ The Digital Fix > Entertainment Discussion Forums > Film Discussion

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-12-2002, 02:12   #1
Guest 3835
Firth of fifth
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Langley
Posts: 1,713
Thanks: 13
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Robocop DVD sound issues

I finally gor aroudn to watching my Robocop DVD from the MGM trilogy set and am less than impressed. I noticed a definite pause between the extra violent bits and normal bits, but i had expected this.. (though it didnt happen on t2)

Anyway...

I noticed in this new bits the picture qulity was below par and the sound was AWFUL...

Also after around an hour of the film the sound wasnt even in sync with the picure!! It did sort itself out towards the end of the film though...

Did anyone else experience this???

Glad i kept my criterion edition now!
Guest 3835 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2002, 08:09   #2
Guest 2959
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 149
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I was never too impressed by the sound on Robocop SE. There seems to be a very slight echo throughout rhe entire film...very annoying.
Guest 2959 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2002, 10:03   #3
SqueakyG
Trusted User
 
SqueakyG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,268
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I can only listen to sound in stereo (home cinema? What's that then?), and the sound mix in this version of Robocop is awful. The two biggest problems are that the score overpowers everything in some action scenes and all other sound is too quiet; the other problem is that dialogue sounds very tinny in a few scenes.

As for the picture... crap also. The 1.66:1 correct aspect ratio is cropped to 1.85:1. But the worst thing is that they changed the muted gray colour palette to a far more saturated picture. Skin tones are orange!

Very poor.
SqueakyG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2002, 13:38   #4
Guest 993
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 16,470
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hence why I didn't bother with it and kept my nice Criterion in the directors approved 1.66:1 ratio with none of this "seamless"(my-arse) branching rubbish (what's the point? The directors approved version is the uncut version anyway!)
Guest 993 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2002, 14:49   #5
Guest 18025
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 256
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'm with you DeadKenny
Guest 18025 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2002, 15:01   #6
Anorakus
Trusted User
 
Anorakus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sulking in a flat somewhere in Hampshire
Posts: 613
Thanks: 2
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by DeadKenny
Hence why I didn't bother with it and kept my nice Criterion in the directors approved 1.66:1 ratio
(snip)

I can understand the director's preference for 1.66:1, but surely the film would have been composed to look good at 1.85:1, given that it would have been projected at this ratio in the vast majority of cinemas?

A.
Anorakus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2002, 16:05   #7
Niceguygeoff
I Do Deny Them My Essence
 
Niceguygeoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Swanage, Dorset
Posts: 10,176
Thanks: 129
Thanked 49 Times in 30 Posts
I got rid of this dvd ages ago. The 5.1 remix is another in a long line of disappointing remixes on MGM discs - I honestly believe that the 2.0 track on the Criterion sounds better (although the LD's pcm track would best this, I'm sure). The dodgy 'integrated' branching is also very naff.

The extras are top-class, however. And for it being 1.85, that's surely the ratio it was projected at? It was opened up to 1.66 and approved by Verhoeven for the Criterion dvd. And it's fair to say he would have voiced his concerns about the new dvd by now - if he was as concerned as some folk still are...
Niceguygeoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2002, 16:18   #8
Guest 1950
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney
Posts: 6,376
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by DeadKenny
Hence why I didn't bother with it and kept my nice Criterion in the directors approved 1.66:1 ratio with none of this "seamless"(my-arse) branching rubbish (what's the point? The directors approved version is the uncut version anyway!)
[toothy]Wot he said[/toothy]
Guest 1950 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2002, 18:31   #9
Jimmyboy
^__^
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 15,613
Thanks: 79
Thanked 23 Times in 14 Posts
Although if you read every single review which compares the Criterion and MGM release, the MGM release always comes out on top.
The complaints expressed here are also found on the Criterion release, the only difference being that the MGM version gives you the option of watching either the Directors cut or the cinema version. Many people have said that there isnt a single noticable pause when watching the Dcut so it's very much dependant on your own set-up. Both the transfer and audio quality are better on the MGM release but they obviously can't escape the low budget constraints of the source material.
Given that the R4 SE can be picked up for around Ł9 I can only conclude that some people will bitch about anything.

Last edited by Jimmyboy; 02-12-2002 at 20:07.
Jimmyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2002, 19:45   #10
Guest 3835
Firth of fifth
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Langley
Posts: 1,713
Thanks: 13
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Dont say how anyone can claim the sound is better on the MGM disc... It is awful... Agree about the overpowering score... had to turn down the rear speakers.... Was realy not impressived
Guest 3835 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2002, 20:06   #11
Jimmyboy
^__^
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 15,613
Thanks: 79
Thanked 23 Times in 14 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by thomasc1982
Dont say how anyone can claim the sound is better on the MGM disc... It is awful... Agree about the overpowering score... had to turn down the rear speakers.... Was realy not impressived
The audio tracks on DVD's are of different volumes anyway so you should adjust your speakers around what it is you're actually listening too rather than taking the lazy option and expecting every dvd to sound at it's best using your own personal settings without change.
Jimmyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2002, 20:51   #12
Guest 993
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 16,470
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Jimmyboy
The complaints expressed here are also found on the Criterion release, the only difference being that the MGM version gives you the option of watching either the Directors cut or the cinema version. Many people have said that there isnt a single noticable pause when watching the Dcut so it's very much dependant on your own set-up.
The Criterion and MGM editions are very different. In terms of the picture, the MGM is more 'cleaned-up', but some say it's overcoloured. The Criterion has more natural colours but by comparison it would look a bit dull to some (but far more in keeping with Verhoeven's "look"). The MGM is 1.85:1 which is a loss to some, but to answer the earlier question, yes it would have been shown 1.85:1 in the cinema. It's up to you whether you want the director's preferred version or the studio's preferred version for "the masses" .

Audio is very difficult to compare. The Criterion is the original as shown in the cinema and approved by the director, whereas the MGM is the studio's interpretation of it remastered into 5.1. I don't see any problems with the audio on the Criterion (but it depends if you can get past the "everything must be 5.1 otherwise it's cr@p" attitude ).

As for the pauses, well yes that depends on the DVD player to a degree, but for some reason there's a problem with "seamless" branching on R2 discs that isn't a problem on some of the R1s. i.e. the R2 discs are mastered in a non-seamless way (apparently something to do with the equipment they had at the time). Seamless should be just that. Ultimately there was no need for it, just have the director's preferred uncut version and that's all (that's the version most people want anyway).

Last edited by DeadKenny; 02-12-2002 at 20:53.
Guest 993 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2002, 02:40   #13
Jimmyboy
^__^
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 15,613
Thanks: 79
Thanked 23 Times in 14 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by DeadKenny

As for the pauses, well yes that depends on the DVD player to a degree, but for some reason there's a problem with "seamless" branching on R2 discs that isn't a problem on some of the R1s. i.e. the R2 discs are mastered in a non-seamless way (apparently something to do with the equipment they had at the time). Seamless should be just that. Ultimately there was no need for it, just have the director's preferred uncut version and that's all (that's the version most people want anyway).
I believe MGM have never claimed Robocop featured seemless branching. The company who use this method (as found on T2:UE) has a supposed waiting list of 6 years therefore seemless branching on the Robocop release was impossible. MGM opted for what they like to call 'intergrated branching', which basically seems to mean not quite seemless but almost.
MGM should have released the Directors Cut only to solve the problem but I can't say Im that bothered by the barely noticable (at least on my present set-up) pauses & it's always nice to have the normal cinema version just so that you can see what the MPAA decided to cut. Also a few people on this forum have said that they prefer the cinema cut to the DC because they find the DC too comic-book like & the amusing OTT violence takes away the impact.
Jimmyboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2002, 13:57   #14
Guest 993
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 16,470
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Jimmyboy
Also a few people on this forum have said that they prefer the cinema cut to the DC because they find the DC too comic-book like & the amusing OTT violence takes away the impact.
That's Verhoeven all over though
Guest 993 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2002, 14:19   #15
Guest 1950
Trusted User
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney
Posts: 6,376
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by DeadKenny
That's Verhoeven all over though
I agree - that's the essence of the film!

Do those same people complain about the adverts in Robocop? They are comic book like as well. The whole film is a comic book tale....
Guest 1950 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:24.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018 Poisonous Monkey Ltd. Part of The Digital Fix Network