2010 - multiple releases - which newer, better?
I tried searching for this here on the site, in the forums, and elsewhere on the net, but couldn't find any definite answers.
I noticed today on columbia house that the picture of the DVD case they have for 2010: The Year We Make Contact is different from the one I bought at Best Buy a few months ago. On Columbia House (and amazon.com) the DVD case has a picture of Discovery against the Monolith against Jupiter ( http://images.amazon.com/images/P/63...1.LZZZZZZZ.gif ). On Bestbuy.com is the picture of the cover of the DVD I have, with the space baby looking at Jupiter ( http://www.bestbuy.com/movies/produc...&e=11011735#VD ). I looked at the date on my DVD and it's 2000. It's one of the latch-close cases. There's only 1 disc and no "8-page booklet" (not sure if the other has those 2 things or not). So my questions are 1) which version is newer and 2) which version is better (and what are the meaningful differences)? |
never heard anything about different dvd versions. I have the same as you....snapper case with no insert, just the gatefold inner cover. if theres one out there with a booklet...I want it. I thought I was alone in really liking this movie. maybe it's because I love Roy!!!
|
Originally posted by laserdogg Years ago MGM briefly released 2010, Westworld, Logan's Run and some others in keepcases with those booklets and yes, 2010 had the 8 page booklet. Since I prefer keepcases, I bought all the ones that were going OOP to be re-released by WB in snappers. Here's the cover of that 2010 disc. This flick is a favorite of mine too since the time I saw it in a theater in '84. http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg you know I want that!! I like the cover much more. and the booklet....nice. hope a search works out. I'll take a used copy of this...something I have not done. saw this here in Des Moines in '84 as well!!!! |
Years ago MGM briefly released 2010, Westworld, Logan's Run and some others in keepcases with those booklets and yes, 2010 had the 8 page booklet. Since I prefer keepcases, I bought all the ones that were going OOP to be re-released by WB in snappers.
Here's the cover of that 2010 disc. This flick is a favorite of mine too since the time I saw it in a theater in '84. Now we need (for Scheider) The Seven-ups to be released and I still need to get Sorcerer (wasn't that title a problem because it wasn't released in its OAR) and maybe 52 Pick-up http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg Edited to add a bunch of crap that threw off the posting sequence. SORRY! |
I agree on the Sorcerer disc. but I had to have it anyway. this is a fav of mine that I also saw in the theater. man, I saw alot of Roy's films on the big screen. and I loved the theater experience back from about 76 to 86....great flicks!
|
Yep, saw Sorcerer here in DSM too. Don't remember which theater though, probably Fleur 4.
I used to work at the River Hills/Riviera and practically lived at the theaters here in DSM. I was truly sorry they destroyed that theater last year. My earliest memory of that theater was my parents taking me to see Patton in '70. That big curved screen was awesome and the theater sold all seats on a reserved basis. Other memorable flicks there were Earthquake, Rollerball (1975), Barry Lyndon, Alien, blah, blah, blah. GF and I usually catch a movie or 2 at Wynnsong now. The rest on DVD or screeners. Sorry for the long winded post, but I felt like sharing :D Oh, to answer the OP question, both transfers are identical (non-anamorphic) |
Dizzy
Watching that long ship go round and round in the DVD menu YO, I liked the Russian who was lost. Hot dogs boiling all summer and which mustard do you like.
Dave Bowman didn't look a day older than in 2001, except when Sheider followed him to where they kept the pods. 2.35:1 LBX :) |
I don't think anyone has officially clarified this, so just in case... [EDIT: Actually, I guess laserdogg already did. Oh well.]
The only difference between the MGM and Warner editions is the packaging. The transfers and content are identical. That being said, I made sure to grab the MGM one just as it was going out-of-print (along with Forbidden Planet, Poltergeist, and Logan's Run). The Warner reissues were the same, but in snappers. :( |
Are they going to rerelease this in a nice anamorphic transfer? I mean, it's no 2001 (what is?), but it's still a good movie in its own right.
|
Originally posted by laserdogg Yep, saw Sorcerer here in DSM too. Don't remember which theater though, probably Fleur 4. I used to work at the River Hills/Riviera and practically lived at the theaters here in DSM. I was truly sorry they destroyed that theater last year. My earliest memory of that theater was my parents taking me to see Patton in '70. That big curved screen was awesome and the theater sold all seats on a reserved basis. good news...found the 2010 oop dvd on-line for 10 bucks!!!!! cant wait to get it...thanks for your info. gonna have to hook up one of these days...buy some dvds....and have a beer.-wink- btw, your collection is.....enough to make me cry! awesome. wish I had been collecting films before 2 years ago! |
If any of you want to pick this movie up, I found it at my Wal-Mart for $5.88. The only difference between this and the MGM disc is the inclusion of a Pan&Scan version.
|
The Warner DVD has the Making-of Featurette from the MGM disc? I thought it didn't, but it does have the theatrical trailer that wasn't on the MGM DVD?
|
cloudnin, I would stay away from any transfer that is currently available. NONE OF THEM are 16x9 enhanced and ALL sport the mediocre transfer used for the widescreen LaserDisc.
|
Originally posted by highdef cloudnin, I would stay away from any transfer that is currently available. NONE OF THEM are 16x9 enhanced and ALL sport the mediocre transfer used for the widescreen LaserDisc. |
Originally posted by highdef cloudnin, I would stay away from any transfer that is currently available. NONE OF THEM are 16x9 enhanced and ALL sport the mediocre transfer used for the widescreen LaserDisc. And yes, I do own letterboxed films, but I haven't picked one up since the day I bought my 16X9... That was over a year ago... If the studios would re-issue Psycho, Vertigo, etc with new 16X9 transfers, I would upgrade in a heartbeat. |
I'm not sure what's keeping them from reissuing 2010. The time was ripe when they did 2001.
Maybe there are licensing issues involved? I think a reissue would sell fairly well. |
Originally posted by LBPound The Warner DVD has the Making-of Featurette from the MGM disc? I thought it didn't, but it does have the theatrical trailer that wasn't on the MGM DVD? Johnny Zhivago, I think you may be overreacting a bit to the 2010 DVD. If you really want to see a crappy DVD, you should take a look at the Zulu my dad got a few years back. It was made by some company I've never even heard of before or since. I swear the video on that thing looked 10 times worse than some of the video clips on those "interactive" CD-ROM games from the 90s. And I guarantee you he paid more that $5.88+tax for that. |
Originally posted by Johnny Zhivago Well, I <i>do</i> subscribe to this attitude... 2010 should be issued again with a nice new 16X9 transfer. The current disc is suck. $5.88 or not, it is suck. Sure, I'd like to have 2010 in the collection, but I'm with highdef here 100%... No 16X9 transfer = no sale. A letterboxed transfer may be OK if you still have a 4X3 set, but for those of us with HDTVs it is completely unacceptable. Yeah, yeah, I know what you're going to say... "but it's better than not having it all! and I'm a film collector/lover!"... Hey, whatever makes you happy, doesn't change the fact that the MGM and WB DVDs of this title are suck. Suck is suck and this disc is suck. And yes, I do own letterboxed films, but I haven't picked one up since the day I bought my 16X9... That was over a year ago... If the studios would re-issue Psycho, Vertigo, etc with new 16X9 transfers, I would upgrade in a heartbeat. Yeah, yeah, I know what you're going to say... "but it's better than not having it all! and I'm a film collector/lover!" Happy owner of the 2010 LD & DVD :D |
Originally posted by Cartload Johnny Zhivago, I think you may be overreacting a bit to the 2010 DVD. If you really want to see a crappy DVD, you should take a look at the Zulu my dad got a few years back. It was made by some company I've never even heard of before or since. I swear the video on that thing looked 10 times worse than some of the video clips on those "interactive" CD-ROM games from the 90s. And I guarantee you he paid more that $5.88+tax for that. laserdogg > That quote was not aimed at <i>you</i> in particular, no offense intended, it was meant as a broad statement for everyone who supports non-anamorphic widescreen transfers... That includes you Gut... ;) |
The stance of No Anamorphic=No Sale really does not have much meaning any more since all the studios are releasing their DVD's Anamorphically enhanced (sans the very few exceptions). Whenever Warner re-releases 2010 it is a given it will be Anamorphic! Boycotting this disc will not push forward a re-release but may in fact delay it if sales of the first DVD are so low that they deem it not worth the trouble of re-releasing. I would prefer Warner concentrate on releasing films not out at all first and then release titles like 2010 when they have time.
If you a a fan of the film do yourself a favor and buy the current release (which goes for next to nothing) and enjoy the film until the studio re-releases it. |
laserdogg, you obviously DO NOT own a 16x9 television, as you WOULD CARE about the poor quality of this sub-standard transfer.
|
Gutwrencher, Laserdogg, you're not seeing movies at the Merle Hay Mall Cinema? I loved River Hills, but Merle Hay Mall really is superior.
I saw Episode I, Jedi and Star Wars at River Hills. It truly rocked. |
Originally posted by highdef laserdogg, you obviously DO NOT own a 16x9 television, as you WOULD CARE about the poor quality of this sub-standard transfer. You obviously DO NOT agree with my purchasing decisions and make assumptions about my viewing enviroment. I will upgrade should an improved version be released. I knew the hotheads out there would respond this way. Ease off, relax and just let it go. |
Originally posted by majorjoe23 Gutwrencher, Laserdogg, you're not seeing movies at the Merle Hay Mall Cinema? I loved River Hills, but Merle Hay Mall really is superior. I saw Episode I, Jedi and Star Wars at River Hills. It truly rocked. Sadly I don't go to MHM Cinema much. The theater is an independent and I didn't care for the "ambiance" the last couple of times I was there. I'll admit I haven't visited in a while as the only movies I can recall seeing there are (gasp) ConAir and Some Like It Hot. Seems the seats were a little old fashioned too. Have they improved it much? |
Originally posted by laserdogg Whether I own a 16x9 set is inconsequential. The only choice for me at this time with this title is the release that's currently available. I choose to purchase the current release despite its shortcomings, because I want the movie. That's it. End of story. My choice. You obviously DO NOT agree with my purchasing decisions and make assumptions about my viewing enviroment. I will upgrade should an improved version be released. I knew the hotheads out there would respond this way. Ease off, relax and just let it go. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:38 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.