View Full Version : The Godfather box set R2?
This arrived from Briatannia this morning and I was gutted to find out that part 2 is split over two disks!
Why is this nessecary? Given that Titanic is roughly the same length and is on one side? I mean even the extra's were on a seperate disk so they had a whole disk to encode the film onto.
This is a real sickener. If I had to name 5 films I'd hate to see split onto two disks, The Godfather Part 2 would be one of them:(
What do you think? Just another way to get more cash out of us?
Bapapapa
15-01-2002, 19:32
It is veeeeeery long, though mate. Aren't you glad of the break?
:nuts:
Just another way to get more cash out of us?
Eh?
Originally posted by Bapapapa
It is veeeeeery long, though mate. Aren't you glad of the break?
:nuts:
Just another way to get more cash out of us?
Eh?
By getting more cash out of us I mean giving us (unnessacerily) 5 disks instead of 4, and charging us accordingly.
I think it was necessary in order to maintain and adequate picture throughout. I'm rather glad they did it than compromise picture quality by squeezing it onto one disc.
I don't see why you think they're trying to get more money from us by including part II on another disc. It's not as if this boxset costs considerablt more than say something like the Alien boxset. (I'm comparing RRP here and not the crazy MVC sales prices:nuts: )
The move two split Part Two onto two discs is quality-related, not financial in the slightest.
Put it this way - each film on its own would have cost, what, £20? And the box set is £60 (or supposed to be), so they aren't overcharging. What's more, they've chucked in an entire disc of extra stuff, so I don't see any reason to complain.
Morpheus2000
15-01-2002, 22:31
Das Boot is a longer film (200 minutes) and the Region 2 is a single sided disc. This has also got a commentary, a featurette and a trailer.
I don't mind The Godfather, Part 2 split on 2 discs too much as it's broken in a decent spot. I find it a bit odd compared to the above though.
Paul Bennison
15-01-2002, 22:50
Originally posted by chris21
This arrived from Briatannia this morning and I was gutted to find out that part 2 is split over two disks!
Why is this nessecary? Given that Titanic is roughly the same length and is on one side?
Titanic is non-anamorphic hense being able to squeeze it onto one disk.
Plus GFII is split at the natural intermission spot (like the Lawrence of Arabia set) so it's not too obtrusive.
Bapapapa
15-01-2002, 22:51
Titanic is also a **** film...
Originally posted by Bapapapa
Titanic is also a **** film...
Couldn't have put it better myself :D
Idle Child
16-01-2002, 00:22
Originally posted by chris21
This arrived from Briatannia this morning and I was gutted to find out that part 2 is split over two disks!
Why is this nessecary?
This is a real sickener. If I had to name 5 films I'd hate to see split onto two disks, The Godfather Part 2 would be one of them:(
What do you think? Just another way to get more cash out of us?
i agree. i thought it was pretty foul play by paramount to split it over 2 discs. they could have just pulled a warner and put out one disc,which was a flipper instead..
plus, there might be more cash in a remaster of the boxset, where they remedy the situation and pack the movie on 1 side of a disc. but i wont be buying anything like that.
i really cant understand why some long movies (3 hours +) can fit on 1 side, but others dont. ?? :confused:
thespook
16-01-2002, 06:54
Originally posted by Idle Child
i agree. i thought it was pretty foul play by paramount to split it over 2 discs. they could have just pulled a warner and put out one disc,which was a flipper instead..
I don't see that this makes much difference as you'd still have to get up to change it anyway. I'd personally prefer 2 disks over a flipper beacuse I always feel scared that I could scratch one side.
BTW - doesn't GodFather Part II have a separate directors commentary track? - could this explain the need for a second disk? :confused:
The photography is often very dark, very textured and very hard to compress onto a DVD-9.
So, to do full justice to the photography, the transfer and the digital restoration, the film (considerably longer than either of the either two) was split onto two discs, and since it originally played with an intermission (at the spot where you change over the discs), there's no real problem.
Originally posted by thespook
BTW - doesn't GodFather Part II have a separate directors commentary track? - could this explain the need for a second disk? :confused:
There is a commentary on each of the Godfathers so it wouldn't be that.
TimJBart
18-01-2002, 17:45
Originally posted by Robby
There is a commentary on each of the Godfathers so it wouldn't be that.
yeh but part II is considerably longer, as well as having a commentary! keep up :D
MichaelPalmer
19-01-2002, 10:53
Well from what I have read the reason was because Coppola wanted an intermission..... When the film was played at the cinema it had a natural point of intermission put in there by the director himself and he wanted it on the DVD's aswell.
This is why the the disc swap seems to be at a 'good point'
i thought it was because it was they added a dts track or something. without it, the film would be 1 disk.
TimJBart
19-01-2002, 14:59
no its just dobly digital, but it is a 5.1 remastering
Michael Brooke
19-01-2002, 16:17
<B>i really cant understand why some long movies (3 hours +) can fit on 1 side, but others don't</B>
Running time is a pretty meaningless yardstick to use when comparing different DVDs, as different types of material require different encoding techniques.
For example, I have two single-sided DVDs that top four hours (Kino's <I>The Sacrifice</I> and Carlton's <I>Great Events of the 20th Century</I>), but it's all too easy to see where sacrifices have been made, as <I>Great Events of the 20th Century</I> in particular suffers from severe compression artefacts.
<I>The Sacrifice</I> is somewhat better - but that's because the film is very slow and static, which from an encoding point of view means that frames don't differ radically from the preceding ones. The nature of MPEG encoding is that it only records the <U>differences</U> between successive frames, not each entire frame (which would require a ridiculous amount of storage space), so a film like, say, <I>Moulin Rouge</I> would take up vastly more space than a DVD of a slower, more stately film - even if both had exactly the same running time.
As Narshty says, <I>The Godfather Part II</I> presents quite a few encoding challenges because the cinematography is very dark and richly textured - so in order to approximate the feel of the original, you'd need a fair bit more space than you would with a film like <I>Titanic</I> (quite apart from the fact that <I>Titanic</I> is non-anamorphic, and therefore uses less space by definition).
So Paramount had a choice between sacrificing picture quality and cramming it all onto one disc, or going for maximum quality (the state of the original materials permitting) and splitting it onto two. I think they made absolutely the right decision, not least because the film has a natural break built in - and I'd personally think it rather more "sickening" and redolent of "foul play" if Paramount <U>had</U> put it on one disc and sacrificed quality as a result!
Originally posted by Michael Brooke
The Godfather Part II</I> presents quite a few encoding challenges
As does Das Boot surely?
As Morpheus2000 has already pointed out, Das Boot is 200 minutes long, features two Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtracks, a commentary track, trailer, featurette and an excellent anamorphic transfer, all on a single DVD 9.
I should point out that The Godfather Part II being split over two discs doesn't bother me in the least. I do wonder how Columbia have managed to fit all of the above on a single DVD 9 without sacrificing picture quality though!
Anyone know how the R2 version of Pearl Harbour compares to the R1 btw? The R2 is on one disc whereas the R1 is split over two discs.
TimJBart
19-01-2002, 17:57
well, i agree with everything michael has just said. I hope he has sorted out the argument once and for all...your so learn-ed......hahaha its pronounced learned.
HighlanderTM
19-01-2002, 23:30
I was thinking about buying Das Boot R2, but with the above reports of it's remarkable picture quality on a DVD9 i'd like more info before i buy. BATMAN for example is a DVD9 and looks like an svhs master...
Dear Mr Echo
20-01-2002, 09:21
Originally posted by HighlanderTM
I was thinking about buying Das Boot R2, but with the above reports of it's remarkable picture quality on a DVD9 i'd like more info before i buy. BATMAN for example is a DVD9 and looks like an svhs master...
I wouldn't worry about the quality of Das Boot - both picture and sound are excellent and the R2 is the best version of this film available as far as I know. At the time of its release it was one of the titles that was a must have for demo quality.
Andrew
Michael Brooke
20-01-2002, 09:28
<B>As Morpheus2000 has already pointed out, Das Boot is 200 minutes long, features two Dolby Digital 5.1 soundtracks, a commentary track, trailer, featurette and an excellent anamorphic transfer, all on a single DVD 9. </B>
Not being privy to the encoding of either <I>Das Boot</I> or <I>The Godfather Part II</I>, I can't comment... except to ask those attacking Paramount why on earth the company opted for a more expensive two-disc solution if they really could have crammed the whole thing onto one disc without sacrificing quality?
Two discs means two masters, two separate pressings, a more elaborate package design - and there's precious little sign that Paramount charged an inflated price to compensate (on the contrary, the price for the complete set is something of a bargain even at RRP, which I doubt too many round these parts actually paid!)
CookieMonster
20-01-2002, 14:19
delete pls
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.