I thought the extras were good, those that i got thru. The trailers woulda been better if they had been encoded in 6 channel instead of the pro logic crap they were subjected to.

As for the extras, I'll probably watch them. The "additional scenes" that they showed on TV looked horribly bad, especially the scene where What's His Butt and What's His Face (can't even remember character or actor names from the movie, they were that impressionable) are caught in a river or some kind of flowing water. Even on TV it looked incredibly fake!

Anyone else wondering if this sort of *mistake* is planned and is actually not an accident in a plot to make more money?

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

Ken,

I only have 3 DTS DVDs, 'Gladiator', 'Chicken Run' and 'The Thin Red Line' in each case the DTS track is lots better sounding then the Dolby digital track.

I can't speak for other titles since the studios don't seem to release DTS disc's in the UK very much.

Perry Sun of Widescreen Review claims that the bass on the Dolby Digital "Superbit" DVDs is better than it is on the DTS tracks. I don't know what that means, however. Does everyone just use bass as the measure in their DTS vs. Dolby Digital evaluations?

The second posting had comments based upon the first posting and then each subsequent posting carried some of the comments further. It is not like from the second post on that everyone started posting things that came from nowhere. Threads DO vary and just because the originator asked one question does not mean that other people should not post if they have a comment that is off of the original topic. That is absurd.

Also, I have a feeling that a lot of people here are not big video fans. I know myself I rarely watch videos because of their horribly low quality...and yes, I'm even talking about DVDs with their motion artifacts that are so prominent in dark scenes. Personally I will not be purchasing the DVD for Phantom Menace because I prefer not to see the bumbling adventures of Jar Jar ever again. Oh wait, that's even further off subject, isn't it? Oh well, such is the way forum discussions work.

Sorry for the mini-rant, but I find your comments insulting toward the members who did participate, but strayed away from the original topic. That never has and never will be a policy, for some of the most interesting and useful topics have come from strayed discussions.

And... am I automatically insulting all of you when I make that point? I hope not. If so, then we should consider how we've insulted Steve. He clearly didn't want to discuss whether or not it was a "good movie."

 |  IP: Logged

Also, in the post above made by me, I was not being a smart alec. I was dead serious, as I believe everyone who followed my post was. And if so many people in so many internet forums have similar opinions that you feel have been done to death, doesn't that suggest that there might be actually something wrong with the movie? Just the sheer mention of the title brings out negative opinions in lots of people who probably feel trapped by Lucas's vision. He can make the movie anyway he wants, but we don't have to like it just because it is his "vision". When he hypes a movie so much like he did, we all get VERY HIGH expectations, especially considering the first three Star Wars movies. When we are let down in such a way, it is perfectly natural to harbor more than a little resentment about it.

Before assuming what people want to or don't want to hear maybe you should read into the original question a bit more... In Steve's question he stated that the movie blew (that would be an opinion) and when asking about a DVD its hard to just give an opinion on the DVD and not the movie itself, they go together.

 |  IP: Logged