Member Morgoth Bauglir Posted May 23, 2010 Member Share Posted May 23, 2010 The mouths sync up a lot better when you have the right language track Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member OpiumKungFuCracker Posted May 23, 2010 Member Share Posted May 23, 2010 This movie kicked a barrel of asses... The story and conviction of the characters are so good in this movie love it!!! You can take out the fighting scenes in this movie and it would still be as good... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member bratty Posted May 23, 2010 Member Share Posted May 23, 2010 So they've screwed up 3 out of 4 releases so far.. wait what was the problem with Invincible Shaolin again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Morgoth Bauglir Posted May 23, 2010 Member Share Posted May 23, 2010 It hasn't been released yet, so I didn't count it as one of the 4. I haven't heard anything disastrous about Invincible Shaolin and Life Gamble, so it's possible that they have only screwed up 3 out of 6 times now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Killer Meteor Posted May 23, 2010 Member Share Posted May 23, 2010 It hasn't been released yet, so I didn't count it as one of the 4. I haven't heard anything disastrous about Invincible Shaolin and Life Gamble, so it's possible that they have only screwed up 3 out of 6 times now. Is the visual glitch seen on the BCI DVD of Opium present on the Funimation one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member kungfusamurai Posted May 23, 2010 Member Share Posted May 23, 2010 I am always confused about these original language debates. Weren't all SB films shot without sound and then foleyed and dubbed into many languages? I may be missing the point or wrong. They were, but when they're reciting the lines, they might either be saying them in mandarin or cantonese, depending on the era the film was made. The later ones (I think '79 onward) started to switch mainly to cantonese. KFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Morgoth Bauglir Posted May 24, 2010 Member Share Posted May 24, 2010 Is the visual glitch seen on the BCI DVD of Opium present on the Funimation one? I would comment if I could, but I have no reason to get the Funimation release since I have the BCI. I've seen the movie twice and never noticed the visual glitch people mention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Fang Shih-yu Posted May 24, 2010 Member Share Posted May 24, 2010 Is the visual glitch seen on the BCI DVD of Opium present on the Funimation one? Is it a pause of some kind that happens to be concurrent with a chapter marker on the disc, maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member chen lung Posted May 24, 2010 Member Share Posted May 24, 2010 Is it a pause of some kind that happens to be concurrent with a chapter marker on the disc, maybe? Na, it's a few frames where it looks as if the brightness has increased. It would seem some copies are affected, whilst others were lucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Kung Foolery Posted June 2, 2010 Member Share Posted June 2, 2010 The BCI blu ray of this just sold on ebay for about $32. It seems to be reaching "collectible" status. There was a copy on amazon for $19.99, of course it was gone the next time I looked. So, is the only real complaint about this Funimation version is it doesn't have the original Cantonese? I could probably live with that, rather than spend $30 plus on the BCI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Wheat Thin Man Posted June 2, 2010 Member Share Posted June 2, 2010 The BCI blu ray of this just sold on ebay for about $32. It seems to be reaching "collectible" status. There was a copy on amazon for $19.99, of course it was gone the next time I looked. So, is the only real complaint about this Funimation version is it doesn't have the original Cantonese? I could probably live with that, rather than spend $30 plus on the BCI. Is there a website that lists the original language track of these films? I've been using Wikipedia, but not every Shaw film is on there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member OpiumKungFuCracker Posted June 2, 2010 Member Share Posted June 2, 2010 The BCI blu ray of this just sold on ebay for about $32. It seems to be reaching "collectible" status. There was a copy on amazon for $19.99, of course it was gone the next time I looked. So, is the only real complaint about this Funimation version is it doesn't have the original Cantonese? I could probably live with that, rather than spend $30 plus on the BCI. I have my copy on order at Hkflix.com, not sure how many they have left but I'll be happy to give it up for a trade of course, :tongue:... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member nectarsis Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 Just started my Funimation version tonight. I may have missed this discussed before, but is this one of the "converted from PAL and timing is off" deals? Fighting scenes seem almost comically fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member chen lung Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 Just started my Funimation version tonight. I may have missed this discussed before, but is this one of the "converted from PAL and timing is off" deals? Fighting scenes seem almost comically fast. A while back, Linn said that Celestial actually sped up fights in 'Secrets Of The Imperial Court'! I don't know if this is for sure though. Either it's Celestial or it was originally like that. A bad PAL conversion is probably not accountable for the symptoms you describe:smile:. Can you confirm the language tracks on this disc? Also, have you spotted any oddities in subtitles (maybe phrasing or grammar)? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member HAZ Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 I've seen some shaw's on 35; scenes that are "sped up" on the dvd don't look sped up on the big screen. I don't know what to attribute that to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member chen lung Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 I've seen some shaw's on 35; scenes that are "sped up" on the dvd don't look sped up on the big screen. I don't know what to attribute that to. Not likely to be damaged frames, but Celestial sprucing up what could have been slow choreography in order to sell it better - maybe they just decided to undertake the role of an uncredited re-editor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member HAZ Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 Not likely to be damaged frames, but Celestial sprucing up what could have been slow choreography in order to sell it better - maybe they just decided to undertake the role of an uncredited re-editor. What's funny is the sped up scenes look somehow still un-natural on 35, but they don't look like a Benny Hill re-run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member nectarsis Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 What's funny is the sped up scenes look somehow still un-natural on 35, but they don't look like a Benny Hill re-run. EXACTLY. They run in between slight undercranked camera to Benny Hill speed. Just odd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Fang Shih-yu Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 Not likely to be damaged frames, but Celestial sprucing up what could have been slow choreography in order to sell it better - maybe they just decided to undertake the role of an uncredited re-editor. What's funny is the sped up scenes look somehow still un-natural on 35, but they don't look like a Benny Hill re-run. Celestial intentionally "rushing things", in regards to Opium and the Kung Fu Master (at least), doesn't sound plausible; then again, with their "audio sweetening" of select titles, nothing can be ruled out!... With many Shaws (many "old school" movies, really), there are times when the way footage is sped up in just the right manner that a busy fight scene looks as frantic as a short with The Three Stooges! (Man, some of those later ones--notably with Shemp--did that OFTEN, and that's only because they were getting OLD!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member HAZ Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 Celestial intentionally "rushing things", in regards to Opium and the Kung Fu Master (at least), doesn't sound plausible; then again, with their "audio sweetening" of select titles, nothing can be ruled out!... With many Shaws (many "old school" movies, really), there are times when the way footage is sped up in just the right manner that a busy fight scene looks as frantic as a short with The Three Stooges! (Man, some of those later ones--notably with Shemp--did that OFTEN, and that's only because they were getting OLD!) I think that the speed up effect is a direct result of their remastering. The colors look very off on DVD's compared to 35mm, too. If you ever get the chance, try to see an unremastered print. There are some that are in nice shape. The remastered DVD's look like the color scenes in the Wizard Of Oz in comparison to an unrestored print in nice shape. I don't think each film in the Shaw catalog was remastered to the same standard, and that's why Celestial has a policy banning the showing of un-remastered materials. They don't want people to see that an unrestored print can look miles better than their restored products. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Fang Shih-yu Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 I don't think each film in the Shaw catalog was remastered to the same standard, and that's why Celestial has a policy banning the showing of un-remastered materials. They don't want people to see that an unrestored print can look miles better than their restored products. THAT is an interesting point, HAZ! Do you think there was some bias going on here, on a film-by-film basis? Maybe even toward films with certain performers? I can't be sure of this 100%, of course, because I have some Image DVDs:sad:, but from what great DVD copies I have of Shaws (select Dragon Dynasty, Media Blasters, Well Go and IVL), some look better than others, and if one considers some inconsistencies found with two films released in the same year--maybe even mere weeks apart--there are hints of varying standards in remastering. It all comes down to the vault materials Celestial had to work with, naturally, but maybe some movies had been given some "VIP" status and put in a better storage location. Is this why a "prestige" picture like Friends looks better than a "programmer" like Young People? (On the other hand, the Shaw classic The House of 72 Tenants was decently remastered, BUT it WASN'T anamorphic widescreen! Why? Some way to reissue a movie that outdid Bruce Lee at the HK box office!) Your 35mm prints aside, of all (non-Image) Shaw DVDs you have, which ones look great and which ones "not so much"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member bratty Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 I wonder if there is some software out there where you can re-author DVDs and slow them down a tiny percentage if need be. I know my Oppo you can dramatically effect the tone of the audio - which is great for my collection of PAL discs (and Four Flies on Grey Velvet!). I forget what SB wuxia I was watching recently but the edits were so fast I thought it was noticeably sped up (barely, but I'm sensitive!). Think it was Deadly Secret .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member HAZ Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 THAT is an interesting point, HAZ! Do you think there was some bias going on here, on a film-by-film basis? Maybe even toward films with certain performers? I can't be sure of this 100%, of course, because I have some Image DVDs:sad:, but from what great DVD copies I have of Shaws (select Dragon Dynasty, Media Blasters, Well Go and IVL), some look better than others, and if one considers some inconsistencies found with two films released in the same year--maybe even mere weeks apart--there are hints of varying standards in remastering. It all comes down to the vault materials Celestial had to work with, naturally, but maybe some movies had been given some "VIP" status and put in a better storage location. Is this why a "prestige" picture like Friends looks better than a "programmer" like Young People? (On the other hand, the Shaw classic The House of 72 Tenants was decently remastered, BUT it WASN'T anamorphic widescreen! Why? Some way to reissue a movie that outdid Bruce Lee at the HK box office!) Your 35mm prints aside, of all (non-Image) Shaw DVDs you have, which ones look great and which ones "not so much"? When it comes to DVD, I'm not that fussy. I saw a 35mm trailer for Chinatown kid that made the DVD look like dirt, and that was a DVD I was happy with until I saw clips on 35mm. The condition of the source materials could be an issue, as well as the time Celestial wanted to devote to restoring a lesser film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member Fang Shih-yu Posted June 4, 2010 Member Share Posted June 4, 2010 When it comes to DVD, I'm not that fussy. I saw a 35mm trailer for Chinatown kid that made the DVD look like dirt, and that was a DVD I was happy with until I saw clips on 35mm. The condition of the source materials could be an issue, as well as the time Celestial wanted to devote to restoring a lesser film. You must have quite an eye for the appreciation of nice 35mm film prints vs. DVDs that have millions of dollars in restoration put into them; it's sort of like going back to the days of Siskel & Ebert when the guys SWORE by laserdiscs while everyone else was complacent with VHS! I would guess if Celestial had let you oversee film transfers, you'd do things differently!... I do wonder what was Celestial's average timeframe for digitally remastering a movie, and think of the complications when "little" details (like multiple language tracks) were involved! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Member HAZ Posted June 5, 2010 Member Share Posted June 5, 2010 You must have quite an eye for the appreciation of nice 35mm film prints vs. DVDs that have millions of dollars in restoration put into them; it's sort of like going back to the days of Siskel & Ebert when the guys SWORE by laserdiscs while everyone else was complacent with VHS! I would guess if Celestial had let you oversee film transfers, you'd do things differently!... I do wonder what was Celestial's average timeframe for digitally remastering a movie, and think of the complications when "little" details (like multiple language tracks) were involved! The thing is i have no eye for anything. That's how amazing 35mm can look for Shaw films. If they ever show any in your city, go & check it out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.