I hope so. I will just hold onto the current MGM release for now as I have no interest in parts II & III.

I would highly recommend anyone thinking about replacing their Criterion to look at the reviews of the color differences between the Criterion and the MGM releases.

There is a world of difference. The Criterion keeps the metallic look while the MGM disc oversaturates the colors and I think ruins the entire feel.

Then there is the whole aspect ratio issue.

You could probably pick up a used criterion for the same price of the trilogy...or wait a few more months to pick up the inevitable seperate release of Robocop.

The deleted scenes are pretty worthless. Some titties and thats really about it - although it includes my favorite guy - the "I'd Buy That For a Dollar" guy.

Also, check out the reviews of the other region's SEs. There are reports of VERY SLOW branching when watching the unrated cut.

That explains why MGM only put the original in a box. But why sell the sequels individually? Doing that assumes that there are people out there who are interested in buying Robocop 3, but DON'T want the original. Honestly, I can't think that the population that fits that description is particularly large. ;)

The way they have set it up now, practically no one will want to buy the individual sequels.

How do you know?

Also, I wonder if it'll be 1.66:1 or 1.85:1. Would be so much better if it were 1.66:1.

Also, maybe the Criterion one will be much cheaper once this is out.

When is RoboChrist coming on DVD?

I know because EVERY OTHER RELEASE of the SE has had the Directors Cut. R1 is the last place to get it. I have had it for at least a year.

And it's 1.85:1.

What was cut out for the theatrical release? Curious minds...

well... not necesarly.

most customers buy DVds beased on "impulse buying" habbit, that we know. so, by having the sequels available saparately from the box, people will tend to buy the sequels (MSRP $14.95; probably goes for $9.99 at store) rather cought up $24-30 for the box set. at the end, it will improve the sales for the sequels too... one way or the other, the sequels will boost enough sales.

but i do agree that it's not a very smart move from MGM. they might as well sell them together like Back to the Future or Inidana Jones (or even Godfather).
but my speculation tells me that Robocop don't have large enough followers/fans as much those other 3 (BTTF, Indiana & Godfather); so having them ONLY available as a set might even hurt the sales in some ways (c'mon not many people will spend $24-30 just like that).
& this also an indication that they MIGHT release the original SE separately in a few months after the release date (maybe they want to see if their marketing strategy hit the jackpot first)

again, just my take

personally, i'll take the box set though i'm not a fan for the 3rd series. i'm just the completist junky

:)

Oh, I dunno... the set is CALLED "THE ROBOCOP TRILOGY." That was my first clue.

I was just asking fans if they think these films flow together as one big kinda-story.

I'm going to stick with the Criterion, but it's comforting to know that if something happens to my disc I'll be able to pick up the director's cut.

I don't get why they'd make it 1.85 when the director wants 1.66 (which shows MORE)

To add insult to injury.

It also just occured to me that MGM doesn't add anamorphic enhancement to 1:66 movies, so it will be 1:85. I must say I prefer the 1:66 as I am sure everyone else does including some guy named Paul V. Too cramped for headroom at 1:85.

Funny you say that. Robocop seems to have at lease some of the Jesus story in it thematically. He is re-born, crucified etc. Paul Verhoeven talks about this in the Criterion commentary.

According to IMDB the director's cut is only one mi nute longer than the theatrical release (seems strange since it lists 4 scenes where there is added footage - though such additions may only be a few seconds longer each). Anyway check this link:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093870/alternateversions

Yes the directors cut is only about a minute longer. But the viiolence is turned way up, and it serves its rightful purpose in context of the movie.

what the link to IMDB doesn't include is the overhead shot of Murphy's bloody body while Officer Anne Lewis weeps - present in the unrated cut but not the R-rated cut.

Something I don't get about MGM. They'll letterbox 1.66:1 films, but won't give them anamorphic transfers. They'll letterbox 1.85:1 films, and usually gives them anamorphic transfers. Usually.

Then there's oddities. Wings Of Desire was presented in its "original theatrical presentation aspect ratio of 1.78:1".
Um, whose theater has screens shaped like that? It was obviously a compromise between the most-probably-intended 1.66:1 ratio and the american standard 1.85:1... and since 1.85:1 was the way it was shown in the US, it isn't much of a big deal... but why can't MGM do this more? Or even better, windowbox 1.66:1 films so that they can be anamorphic?

oh man, snot just about flew out of my nose when I laughed at that

...and I won't kid myself. I'll probably keep my Criterion and buy the box.

-AC

Who's selling it for $6?

yea I wanna know too

I bought mine here:
http://www.ezydvd.com.au/item.zml/220153
Right now its $14 American.
It was much cheaper a few months ago.

They seem to be out of stock, I am wondering if it has gone OOP to make room for the Trilogy set which they list here

http://www.ezydvd.com.au/item.zml/221706

FYI...that's PAL. ;)

I think im just going to stick with my Criterion

Thanks for the info.

I'll wait for the Director's cut as a single release. I don't want the sequels. :)