[Ears]

If like me, you love this film, but also own a big screen or in my case, a very big screen produced by my dlp projector, you will want to buy the new edition of Goodfellas as it is far superior to the original non anamorphic version.

The picture is greatly improved...not reference but probably a 7.5-8 compared to the original which had a really lousy transfer.

I would rate the original as a 4-4.5

This is one of those classics that I don't mind double dipping on.
I just wonder.....what took soooooo long.

[azryan]

As far a I knew/know... (which may be wrong)... this was one of the early films on DVD and was a double-sided 'flipper' which always pissed me off.

I've never seen another version till now and am glad they finally put this out at the very least in a new transfer and all on one friggin' side of the disc! heh

One of my fav. films of all time. A '10'.

Same for his post-Goodfells  'Casino'... kidding!' hehe (not horrible but no classic).

Oddly I didn't flip over his pre-Goodfellas 'Mean Steets' either.

And talking other gangster 'classics'.... I just am not impressed with the Godfather series at all.

I just watched all three last month to give them all another look to see if my opinion would change... nope.

Some solid acting in it but Brando IMO isn't one of those best performances.

He hardly says or does anything and you can't understand him even. I just never saw how people consider him easilty the best actor EVER? He even considered acting to be a totally stupid job.

Sorry... off topic I guess but was there a topic here other than an anouncement (no offence Ears) that we've all probably seen in stores already? Since we're all DVD fans.

I guess I never understood why this forum is so chock full of release anouncments?
Let's talk movies not release dates. Maybe if it's something obscure.

[Ears]

The first edition flipper was practically unwatchable except on my little 35in Toshiba cinema series tv.

That is the topic
How many times have you bought a re-releasae or special edition of a favorite movie and been let down by it.

I whish more posts were about quality of transfer and less talk about how the movie should of been, or how there was no explanation for this or that ect ...ie, the Kill Bill thread.

I for one, hate wasting money on double or tripple dips, only to find its the same old transfer.

I also do not care much for the Godfather series, but I do think Casino was decent.

[azryan]

How many times have you bought a re-releasae or special edition of a favorite movie and been let down by it?

Never for me. I don't buy DVD's. I rent 'em. The few DVD's I do own only have one release so no 'special edition' to buy 'cuz that's usually the phrase on most DVD's. Like a con game. How's it 'special' when it's the 'only' edition.

I guess 'cuz fools still buy VHS?

Maybe there should be a sepp. DVD forum here 'cuz DVD transfer quality isn't 'Cinema' IMO but I can understand why it's important to you and others. Not to me though.

[bubba966]

This forum is exactly for discussing both DVD/LD/whatever transfer/audio/extras/etc quality as well as discussing the movies themselves. And film (35MM/70MM/IMAX) discussion as well.

No need for any separate forum.

Back to the topic at hand...

At some point I'd like to pick up the new Goodfellas disc. I got rid of the original as soon as I found out it was a damn flipper. If I'm going to flip sides, I might as well stick with the LD (which sounded better and looked better anyway). So I picked up the LD after I dumped the flipper disc.

Nice to know the transfer on the new disc is better as well. I woulda picked it up for the sole reason that it's now all on one side. Better quality is a welcome bonus.

[Rob Babcock]

I hate flippers.  The only two I've ever had were Robin Hood & Stargate, and I've long since ditched them.

[azryan]

-No need for any separate forum.

We have sepp. audio forums to help make things less confusing (several of them in fact) so there's this exact idea in use on this very forum and the reason 'why' that's logical to do.

You simply say 'no need'. Not really a debate point is it?

I suggested one forum about movies -call it 'Cinema' which we already have.
And another one called 'Movie Media' meant to be about the formats and the technical side of the process and quality.

I think that's pretty clear and logical and the two groups are more distinctive/different than say the 'Audio' '2-chan.' and 'Multi-chan.' forums which often have subjects that would fit into more than one forum.

[JoshK]

I loved Goodfellas, friggin great movie!  I might have to pick this one up.  Good to know it is of good quality.

By the way, are LD usually better quality than DVDs?

[bubba966]

By the way, are LD usually better quality than DVDs?

LD's are analog. So, the LD player used for playback has a great affect on the overall quality (just like vinyl).

That said, the uncompressed PCM stereo tracks on LD's is quite extrodinary. You'd be surprised how well a PCM stereo track can sound run in Pro Logic. I can only imagine how well it'd sound run in PL II.

DTS LD's also have full bit-rate DTS tracks. DVD's have half bit-rate DTS tracks (the last full rate DTS DVD was Saving Private Ryan).

The transfer matters a good deal. The last few years of LD production saw some really great LD transfers. A great transfer on an LD played back on a good player can look better than a DVD since LD's aren't compressed.

DD on LD's is better than DD on DVD's. This I've not been able to figure out yet. The best I can figure out so far is that DD on LD's has a better dynamic range than DD on DVD's. I don't know if the fact that DD is stored on LD's as analog information has anything to do with it.

So it does come down to individual media releases as well as the hardware being used. And unfortunately it costs a lot more to do LD well than it does to do DVD well. Take X-Men for example. Can be found just about anywhere on DVD for $10-$15. Decent DVD, but the LD is better. Problem being the LD is $150 or so, IF you can actually find a copy.

One thing to note though, that LD's were rarely ever put out for 16:9 sets. So if you're running a 16:9 set they're not such a good idea. And most digital sets don't handle analog sourced material worth a damn. The only digital set I've seen yet that will display a good LD signal is the Loewe's sets of the last couple of years. So LD's are also not a good idea if you're running a digital display.

And Josh, if you ever manage to stop by, I'll show you what LD can do...

[bubba966]

We have sepp. audio forums to help make things less confusing (several of them in fact) so there's this exact idea in use on this very forum and the reason 'why' that's logical to do.

You simply say 'no need'. Not really a debate point is it?

I suggested one forum about movies -call it 'Cinema' which we already have.
And another one called 'Movie Media' meant to be about the formats and the technical side of the process and quality.

I think that's pretty clear and logical and the two groups are more distinctive/different than say the 'Audio' '2-chan.' and 'Multi-chan.' forums which often have subjects that would fit into more than one forum.

No, the Cinema isn't like Audio Central/2-Channel/Multi-Channel circles. Those are all hardware related circles. The Cinema is like the Music circle.

Both are places to talk about both the content quality, as well as the presentation quality.

In both circles there's threads about either content or presentation quality. Sometimes both are covered in the same thread.

It just so happens that in the Cinema presentation quality is more frequently discussed than it is in the Music circle.

I will admit that the description of the Cinema circle doesn't really mention discussion of presentation quality. I suppose something less "confusing" could be come up with.

The Cinema circle is one of the oldest circles at AC. And it's only got 274 topics as of right now. Which is less than 1 new topic every other day (AC's been around for 612 days). That's not a whole lot of traffic. And the Music circle has almost twice the traffic. It doesn't need to be split up into two circles.

[azryan]

That's not a whole lot of traffic. And the Music circle has almost twice the traffic. It doesn't need to be split up into two circles.

I can see your logic in that idea but I still disagree, and I'll state 'why'....

I'm a HUGE movie fan yet I almost never post on the 'Cinema' forum 'cuz it always looks to me like all the threads are about 'what DVD's did I buy...' or '"Blockbuster X" is now on DVD', etc...

It just doesn't 'look' like a Cinema forum to me. I'm thinking I'm not the only one to think this.

You might say -'So? That's your fault for not posting about what you want, and you're free to talk movies... but you can see no one wants to.'

And that'd be a seemingly valid point but... the threads that 'may' not be about release dates or DVD transfers are hidden unless you explain in the thread title that you'd actually like to discuss the film itself.

And you know you just can't do that in a thread title.

I think this would help the 'Music' forum too if it was split in two (for the same reasons). That forum that you bring up as an example of why splitting this forum isn't needed.

No offence but this forum could really be named the 'Rob and Bubba' forum too.
You two tend to post nearly every thread and they are typically all release date info and 'Look, I just bought these DVD's' type deals.

As a movie fan it's not interesting to me, and that's a bit messed up for a 'Cinema' forum as I see it.

That's a factor in why this 'Cinema' forum isn't as jumpin' as it could be IMO.

Splitting in half would test if I'm right... or show that in fact not many people actually want to talk about the movies themselves that we're all big fans of.

I'd like to test that and don't think you can just say 'there's no need' as if it's a known fact.

Does it hurt to have an extra forum? I'd think a 'Movie Media' forum would need pretty much zero moderation as there'd be little to argue about and it'd be hard to imagine anything that could get so heated there that it'd need a mod to deal with 'issues'.

I hate to ruin Ears thread if he wants to talk about the transfer quality of this DVD but really... what more is there to say about that?

I think there's no one who would disagree and say.. 'What? That years old 'flipper' looked much better!!'

These aren't really 'thread/discussion' topics so much as singular post/anouncements and me talking about Goodfellas as a film either messes this thread up and/or itself is kept hidden by the thread title... or I could start a new thread on Goodfellas but that seems messy too.

Does none of this seem logical?

[Ears]

azryan, the way I see it, most rarely want to debate what a film should have been, or the dialog, directors intent ect.

Most people only care about what they think about a given film, form an opinion, and stick to it.

For instance, I liked Daredevil, despite Afleck being over exposed and not the most talented actor, and Electra, not being exposed enough whith the pg 13 rating.
Some people hate this movie, but I really could give two sh*ts and bought it anyway.

You take a movie like Goodfellas that is liked  by most and recognised as one of the best, if not the best mob movie ever made and start a thread on the content.
I don't know what you could possibly debate about it ,as those that love this film, pretty much like it through and through.

I can think of nothing that could have made it any better, other than an over due anamorphic transfer all on one side of the disc.

I have no problem whith film content debates, but to have a forum just for that seems a bit much imo, especially if were not allowed to discuss quality of transfer.

Watching on a big screen, I am a lot more picky about quality of transfer than I used to be, and this includes rented dvd's.

A couple of other movies that I like, also need an anamorphic dvd transfer.
One is a cheesy movie that I like for some reason....Armeggedon, and the other is Sling Blade uhhhhhhh huuuuuu  

[Rob Babcock]

I'm afraid I'm with Bubba on this one- the Cinema doesn't really have enough following to further dilute it over more circles.  There's no inherent reason that posts here don't include info on the quality of the technical presentation.  It's more that most people either don't care or don't care to elaborate.  Although many discussions of movies on DVD will give impressions about the quality of the transfer, sound, etc.

We already have film playback broken down into software (ie Cinema) and the hardware used to reproduce it.  Seems to me a waste to further break it down.  I suppose you could post a poll, but I wouldn't expect much.  Seems like a topic better handed by posting a thread in an existing circle.

[Tonto Yoder]

If like me, you love this film, but also own a big screen or in my case, a very big screen produced by my dlp projector, you will want to buy the new edition of Goodfellas as it is far superior to the original non anamorphic version.

Is this the version included in the recent Scorsese box?
BTW, when Ebert & Not-Ebert reviewed the box,  what interested me most was the inclusion of "After Hours" rather than "Goodfellas."

[JoshK]

Ryan,

Don't take this the wrong way but you are WAY over analyzing this, just let it be what it is and add what you care to.  I really see no need for splitting this and I do understand what you are saying.

[Ears]

If like me, you love this film, but also own a big screen or in my case, a very big screen produced by my dlp projector, you will want to buy the new edition of Goodfellas as it is far superior to the original non anamorphic version.

Is this the version included in the recent Scorsese box?
BTW, when Ebert & Not-Ebert reviewed the box,  what interested me most was the inclusion of "After Hours" rather than "Goodfellas."

I bought the seperate version.....not sure if it is also included in the boxed Scorsese set.
I would hope so though.

[bubba966]

If like me, you love this film, but also own a big screen or in my case, a very big screen produced by my dlp projector, you will want to buy the new edition of Goodfellas as it is far superior to the original non anamorphic version.

Is this the version included in the recent Scorsese box?

I checked the Scorsese box today at the local shop. And it is indeed the exact same disc that's in the Scorsese box.

Kinda makes the box a damn good deal if you can get one cheap. I think Goodfellas is going for about $20 by itself. And apparently Fry's has the Scorsese box for $30. $10 more to get an additional 4 movies (and a little box to keep them in) isn't bad at all...

[azryan]

You guys seem incapable of backing up you opinions with any reason's 'why' at all AND you all totally ignore my direct and specific reasons 'why'.

You guys prove 'why' this 'Cinema' forum has always been dead.

[Ears]

I checked the Scorsese box today at the local shop. And it is indeed the exact same disc that's in the Scorsese box.

Kinda makes the box a damn good deal if you can get one cheap. I think Goodfellas is going for about $20 by itself. And apparently Fry's has the Scorsese box for $30. $10 more to get an additional 4 movies (and a little box to keep them in) isn't bad at all...

This is the exact reason there should be more posts on quality and special releases.
If I had known about the boxed set before buying the individual new Goodfellas transfer, I would have most likely bought the boxed set.

[bubba966]

I checked the Scorsese box today at the local shop. And it is indeed the exact same disc that's in the Scorsese box.

Kinda makes the box a damn good deal if you can get one cheap. I think Goodfellas is going for about $20 by itself. And apparently Fry's has the Scorsese box for $30. $10 more to get an additional 4 movies (and a little box to keep them in) isn't bad at all...

This is the exact reason there should be more posts on quality and special releases.
If I had known about the boxed set before buying the individual new Goodfellas transfer, I would have most likely bought the boxed set.

I didn't even know about the Scorsese box set until it was brought up here. Might have to pick it up someday...