VT 1010

Um, what? Are you referring to the feed lips or the follower?

I thought that was a line from Stallone in Tango and Cash?

Looks like Rambo 5 isn't going to be a weird as we all thought: http://stallonezone.com/wordpress/?p=1847 From the above fan site,

For longer distances, quality cables do become important. If the display and the computer are located right next to each other though, then the cheap ones should be perfectly fine.

Well Ridley's involved with (and will possibly direct) a prequel. Would that change your mind?

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet or not, but the L-Button used in combination with right or left on the D-Pad controls the "rudder." I didn't even realize it until I accidentally pressed it.

I completely agree, but you left out sound design, music, and (at the time) graphics. In addition, the co-op mode was another innovative feature.

Wong Sheung Long is going to be the focus? I didn't know that--actually, I know almost nothing about the sequel... Either way, I can't wait! Indeed WSL was probably more influencial on Bruce as his Sihing than Ip Man. In fact, it is often said that the appearance of Bruce's early Wing Chun was very reminisciant of WSL's. I'm sure this portrayal of Lee will still be more accurate than Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story.

There are other advantages to Blu-ray than resolution alone. Bitrate has already been mentioned, but another important advantage is color. Blu-ray uses a different color space and should have better color reproduction than the DVD. Blu-ray also can store the video at 24fps (I know I'm over-simplifying the frame rate here). If it's encoded at 24fps, it shouldn't have the same artifacts than if it were a 60i source converted to 24p with IVTC. 24p also helps with the compression. As for resolution, sure there is only so much detail you're going to see with animation; however, if the resolution is higher, then the lines should be thinner and clearer. The image should have an overall more "pleasant" look with a good HD transfer--even if you don't notice new "details." And yes, the DVD did have EE.

Yeah, that's pretty much it. My earlier comments didn't in any way contradict this, nor did it claim this to not be so. That said, if you have poor film stock (as well as lenses/cameras), this may not necessarily be the case. There are, however, so many variables with both shooting formats that it isn't easy to just make a blanket statement that one is inherently better than the other. I was primarily responding to this statement. There are current standards that exist which are capable of virtually equaling the RESOLUTION of 35mm film. I was referring to the telecine and editing processes as an example of this and 35mm's limitations. I guess I just wasn't clear enough in articulating my point. I would think any further discussion of this specific point would probably be best to continue in the Home Theater thread, since we seem to be getting off topic here... I completely agree with you. Like you mentioned before, there are other advantages to a Blu-ray release than just resolution.

I forgot to add that this doesn't even factor in the experimental and eclectic standards, which have gone even higher in resolution.

Not quite true. Keep in mind that the amount of detail in a 35mm film frame isn't always going to be extremely high. There are many variable that determine the final "resolution" of 35mm film. Also, don't forget Digital Cinema standards as well. Many new films--as well as old ones when they are digitally remastered--are scanned at the 2k or 4k (or sometimes even 6k) resolution standards for compositing, editing, and telecine (I can't remember the exact pixel dimensions off the top of my head, but think of it like 1080p being around 1.5k or so). These standards are used by professionals in the film industry because it is believed that this is approximately the equivalent amount of picture information contained on the film. These resolutions allow for the preservation of fine grain detail. The higher the resolution at which you scan the film, the more you get diminishing returns. Once you've accurately captured all of the film grain, you kind of reached the limit of picture information.

Actually, Bruce started training with Ip Man when he was 14 or so. He moved back to America when he was 18. Bruce did come back to Hong Kong a couple of times and met with Ip Man, but they were less focused on training due to Bruce starting his own thing. Bruce always looked up to him, even when he started to move away from Wing Chun. The Star Wars style portrayal isn't as far off as you think, though it does still have problems. I too am a bit worried about how Bruce Lee will be in the sequels. Another minor correction: Bruce moved back to the US so he could keep his citizenship (he was born here). When he got here, he went to Edison Technical School (IIRC) and then went to Washington State a few years later. BTW, I liked the Ip Man movie as well.

They're already out of stock.

That doesn't look like it is truly in HD. It is more than likely upscaled. If you look at the cap from the DVD and then the one from the "HD" youtube clip, you'll notice the HD clip doesn't seem to have any visible grain. If was really at a higher resolution, then it should at least have just as much grain--if not more--than the DVD. It looks like they also messed with the contrast a bit on the HD clip to give it more "pop."

I really don't like AICN either...BUT they often get exclusives and news before anyone else, so I'll still check it out every once in awhile. I don't know about this new Rambo. It sounds pretty...out there. I'll probably still see it anyway.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/42259 http://www.aintitcool.com/node/42256 Well this seems...interesting...

On specs alone, DVD is still superior. The PCM tracks can have a sample rate of 48kHz, compared to Laserdisc's 44.1kHz. In addition, DVD can support Dolby Digital at a bit rate of up to 448kbit/s. Most DD tracks on LD only had a bit rate of 384kbit/s (IIRC). In practice, however, LDs would often sound better than their DVD counterparts--especially the ones released early on in DVD's life. There's also the mixing. For example, the DTS track on the Jurassic Park DVD not only had a lower bit rate, but also had a different mix than the Laserdisc. Now if you drag Blu-ray into this conversation, LD has no real comparison. As far as video is concerned, you also have the issue of chroma noise. This is due to--as JB0 stated earlier--it's an analog composite video format, where as DVD is digitally compressed YCbCr video. To get the most out of LD's picture, you need a good player and a good comb filter (in either the player or the display). Provided a DVD is mastered properly, this kind of noise shouldn't be an issue. That said, I still don't know why Laserdisc is in a thread about tech that went nowhere. It was around for twenty-four years and evolved throughout its lifespan, pioneering (no pun intended) many of the standard features that are on DVD and Blu-ray. I hardly think it qualifies as having gone nowhere. Shaorin, that's a nice anime collection. I still need to get M+ on LD. I'm still too embarassed to admit how much I paid for DYRL? Perfect Edition on LD and my CLD-97. In the end, it was worth it. Picture and sound quality aside, LD definitely has nicer artwork on the packaging. They were far too often pieces of art themselves--especially the anime releases.

There's already a Downfall video:

I'll never look at cat food the same way again...

Ridley Scott returns to Alien! http://www.aintitcool.com/node/41887

Sega releasing games in those huge and fragile CD cases. They just break so easily... I also think Nintendo canceling the Virtual Boy was another blunder.

Which member was it that had the...ahem...lovely doorknobs again?

I've never been banned either. I always try to act in a polite and respectful manner. I follow the rules. I'm kind of boring it seems... Maybe I can change that... ...STEALTH!

Is this it? http://www.yojoe.com/sgtsavage/p40.shtml