Apocalypse now dvd

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by rafayel, Sep 7, 2002.

  1. rafayel

    rafayel Auditioning

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whats the difference between the video and audio transfer for Apocalypse now and Redux.

    Also is Apocalypse now a good audio reference disc.
     
  2. HankM

    HankM Second Unit

    Joined:
    May 15, 1999
    Messages:
    332
    Likes Received:
    0
    Redux has a slightly cleaner brighter transfer. When Redux was released they had to remaster it so all the extra footage would blend without color differences and grain. The sound on both seem identical, maybe a tad more bass on Redux. Both sound incredible. The main difference you will see is in the transfer.
     
  3. Hendrik

    Hendrik Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 1998
    Messages:
    595
    Likes Received:
    0
    "...The main difference you will see is in the transfer."
    ...and in the AR (2.35:1 for AN, 2.00:1 for ANR)
    ...and in the length (153 mns for AN, 202 mns for ANR)
    . . . [​IMG] . . .
     
  4. Patrick McCart

    Patrick McCart Lead Actor

    Joined:
    May 16, 2001
    Messages:
    7,543
    Likes Received:
    170
    Location:
    Georgia (the state)
    Real Name:
    Patrick McCart
    Both DVD's are 2:1, the AR requested by Vittoro Storro (sic?).

    Redux features a dye-transfer Technicolor print...which looks fantastic.
     
  5. JeremySt

    JeremySt Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2001
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    14
    Real Name:
    Jeremy


    You might want to check your facts there. Both discs are the same. 2:1 They may differ from the theatrical OAR, but in either case, the DVDs were supervised by Storraro.
     
  6. Hendrik

    Hendrik Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 1998
    Messages:
    595
    Likes Received:
    0
    ...ahh... my 'facts' came from this review, which confidently avers "Widescreen 2.35:1 (Anamorphic)" ... whereas, as I just now noticed this review states: "...this immaculate 2.20:1 widescreen transfer..." ... otoh, with this review we are indeed in 2.00:1 territory ... and yet, this review mentions an AR of 1.85:1 ... however, this review further muddies the water by stating, confusingly "16x9 widescreen enhanced", which some people -myself included- may take to mean an AR of 1.78:1 ( = 16:9 ) ... all of which tends to prove that one should not always believe what one reads...
    ...on a side note: it would appear that the Norwegians got screwed by Paramount (Norge), since their DVD only offers "16:9 letterbox", which I take to mean: plain vanilla 1.78:1 with no anamorphic 'enhancement' ... but I may well be wrong (as I often am)...
    (signed) Insomniac Passing Pedant
    . . . [​IMG] . . .
     
  7. Eric T

    Eric T Second Unit

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2001
    Messages:
    266
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rafayel, I don't think AN in either form would be considered reference-quality for audio or video, but they are still quite good. Capt. Willard's voice-overs are a pretty good test for center-channel, though. They are really up-front, and always make me jump a little when they come in :b
     
  8. Dave H

    Dave H Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2000
    Messages:
    5,540
    Likes Received:
    177
    Redux looks significantly better on my set-up. NO doubt about it.

    ISF'd 61" Sony KP-61V80
    Panasonic RV80 DVD player
     
  9. Seth Paxton

    Seth Paxton Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 1998
    Messages:
    7,585
    Likes Received:
    0
    Redux should look damn fine as it was gorgeous in the theaters. I don't like this version of the film nearly as much, but the colors/print in general were wonderful. [​IMG]
    The real reason for buying one or the other is the actual cut of the film you prefer. For me that is the original, not Redux (though I also own that DVD).
     
  10. Dharmesh C

    Dharmesh C Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2000
    Messages:
    994
    Likes Received:
    0
    I still the framing is too tight in 2.1, Vittario got it wrong in my opinion [​IMG]
     

Share This Page