Putting cheap comic strip aside, aren't you the socialist fool who criticized the Bush fund raising? And for someone who obviously doesn't know the details of our new campaign-finance reform laws, I can say that you didn't have a clue of what you're talking about.

For months after the 2000 Election, the Democrats were pounding the pavement for campaign-finance reform and when they got it through the McCain-Feingold Bill, it was the Democrats and their 3rd Party special interest groups who immediately started looking for loop-holes once they realized that the money that they most rely on (soft money) is what the reform bill was supposed to squash.

But anyway, I have yet to understand why dedicated and converted socialists in other countries always worry about how the supposed "downtrodden" are affected in the United States. It's NOT your problem. Besides, the difference between the downtrodden in the US and those elsewhere is that those in the US can do something about it. Those elsewhere are stuck forever in the government wellfare programs. People who are poor are poor because of the CHOICES they made, NOT because of the "system".

I was so tempted to say something myself about the differences, I personally don't care if the Criterion edition is director approved, I'd have to say I like the colours on the MGM release - sorry.

Nope. You've got the wrong commie pinko tree-hugging hippie freak. Try again.

Great! As long as you know the colors aren't what the director originally intended, that's cool.

Blah, blah, blah. Why don't you take the political bullshit to another thread and keep this one on topic before it's closed?

And leave the personal attacks out completely while you're at it.

I don't watch dvds to please Paul Verhoeven. MY eyes say the better looking version is MGM. Oh, when I watched the new set, I never once thought to myself "what is Paul Verhoeven going to say when he finds out I'm watching the version with nice color that he didn't approve?".

Yeah whatever floats your boat.

Maybe you should have a little more pity on those who prefer Fullscreen too. Or those that prefer Colorized Black and White films while you are at it.

Would you also watch colourised versions of Black and White films becasue they look better ? Just curious, im not taking a dig at you or anything since I dont know whether the dull criterion version or the very bright MGM version is the correct one.

For the record, I have the Criterion and I like the movie but not enough to buy another version of it.

Despite the above poster, I have to agree. I like the color intensity of the MGM disc. However, the sound mix is quite weak IMO.

MGM


Criterion


I think this is pretty telling - the Criterion captures the lighting better. Everything about the MGM disc seems way too saturated for me.

Unless you ask Paul now which transfer he prefers, saying the Criterion is better or correct means little. And in the end, it's still personal preference.

You're right, the shadow detail looks much better on the Criterion in those examples.

Did the Unrated parts have grain in the Criterion version? I noticed it on the MGM.
Robo's guns sound muffled during the coke factory shootout with Boddicker's thugs. Can someone compare the 2 main uncut scenes (Murphy execution and ED-209 in the board room). The MGM seems a tad different, maybe the sound. No longer have the Criterion to compare.

On Criterion's side, however, the 1.66 picture gives more info on the top and bottom and is much less cropped on the sides, especially if you watch it windowboxed in progressive scan. So it's a must for completists. It shows what a film looks like before excessive cropping and TV overscanning.

It's just too bad the print sacrifices "true whites" for low contrast and it has edge enhancement consistent with the lower resolution of a non-enhanced-for-widescreen transfer.

The film was recorded with the Dolby Spectral Sound process, which is a fancy way of saying 4.0 discrete channels encoded on 2.0 channels Dolby Stereo (front, left, center, surround) and with an equalizer (the Spectral Sound processor) which allows to boost the bass at will without altering the highs during mixing.

The Dolby Stereo versions (like the Criterion's) are quite effective. The 5.1 version does play the music in stereo in the surrounds (which makes it quadraphonic and very present and engulfing throughtout) but I can't pinpoint a single instance of "discrete" left or right action of sound effects in the surrounds. It's either a general echo or a centered effect (like a gun going off in the back). That's my impression. Having said that, the film won an Oscar for sound, didn't it?

It could be argued by purists that the later inclusion of directional sound effects in the surrounds (in a 5.1 mix) would be not so much an improvement on the original as unnecessary tampering with a prize-winning sound mix we all know and love.

We have managed to take an indepth look at the two main releases of MGM's Robocop Trilogy (US & UK), comparing them alongside eachoter; as well as comparing them both against the OOP Robocop Criterion release. Click here for the full review.

Guess I'll be keeping the CC as well since its shown in the correct aspect ratio.

huh? Looks like the R2 shows more than the R1



http://www.dvddebate.com/modules.php...rder=0&thold=0

Yeah, but too inconsequencial to make much difference. I doubt if a "micron" on either side is going be to noticeable in any shot.

Set overscan will eliminate any difference...