DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   DVD Talk Archive (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk-archive-54/)
-   -   "Jack the Giant Killer" non-anamorphic/faded (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk-archive/357402-jack-giant-killer-non-anamorphic-faded.html)

sparks 04-08-04 09:38 AM

"Jack the Giant Killer" non-anamorphic/faded
 
What is MGM thinking? The print they put on this DVD is non-16x9, it is 1.85:1 (what is the OAR?) and it looks like it was taken from a 10th generation VHS copy!

Even though it's a poor mans "7th Voyage of Sinbad," they could have at least give us a print that was worthy of some of MGM's past efforts.

Does anyone have the full frame Goodtimes edition? Is the Goodtimes the regular or musical (singing during certian scenes) version?

Once again we get c*** from major film companies who care less what we want, only what they want to give us!

littlefuzzy 04-08-04 10:25 AM

According to IMDB, this was a 1.37:1 AR.

bboisvert 04-08-04 11:04 AM

I too would like a comparison between the MGM and Goodtimes. This is pretty disappointing... I had hoped that MGM would improve upon the mediocre Goodtimes disc...

sparks 04-08-04 05:29 PM

Did you notice the front cover? If you think the monster looks like that, boy, will you be surprised!!!

sparks 04-08-04 10:58 PM

One last thing, I just compared the LD with the DVD and here's the results:

I'm playing them both on a 65711 16x9 RPTV (an anolog picture doesn't look to good on a digital monitor).

The LD is 1.37:1 and the picture looks terrible and the colors are muted compared to the DVD.

The DVD is 1.85:1 and shows alot more information on all 4 sides which makes the LD looked cropped. Of course the colors and picture are much better than the LD.

shill66 04-11-04 01:49 AM

The DVD looks a LOT better than is described by sparks in the first post. (But it's still non-anamorphic.)

bboisvert 04-12-04 09:37 AM


Originally posted by sparks
The DVD is 1.85:1 and shows alot more information on all 4 sides which makes the LD looked cropped. Of course the colors and picture are much better than the LD.
:hscratch:

In your first post, you said that "it looks like it was taken from a 10th generation VHS copy". Now your saying that the colors and picture are much better than the LD? (Which, admitedly wasn't a great LD... but still...)

I'm not sure I understand.

sparks 04-12-04 10:33 AM

Okay, okay, here's what happened. I put it on to see if they screwed up on the label and just maybe it was anamorphic..of course it wasn't.

The DVD picture didn't look good, so I compared it to the LD and the DVD was much, much better looking than the LD.

There's no scratches or anything to compare to see if they used the same print as the LD, but the edge enhancement is the worst I've ever seen. Worse than "Tombstone" and others.

IMHO, it's on par with color films from those cheapo companies like Brentwood, etc. :D


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:06 PM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.