John Carpenter's, The Fog out Oct. 4th. (1 Viewer)

[Chris Tedesco]

Bring on the reviews!

 

[Bill Thomann]

I have mine ordered from bestbuy.com with a couple other titles since they have an exclusive bonus moviecash ticket to the remake & their price isn't any more than anybody else's online. Free movie + a remastered dvd = a sale.

 

[Chris Tedesco]

Someone over at DVDfile stated that it's the same transfer even thought it says remastered. I need to confirm this though.

Yeah, Best Buy for 9.99. I'll get it if it's a new transfer.

 

[Kevin M]

Yeah, hell if you don't have it already why not? The former transfer was pretty good so this one (if it is indeed new) should be nice....no guarantees on that just because the last one was good of course.

 

[Greg_S_H]

$9.99? Well, I might be able to do that. I don't think the original release was much more than that. I have no plans to see the remake, but if Best Buy's including a movie ticket, maybe I will.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I am reserving judgement on the remake for now, the trailer I saw before Red Eye looked pretty cool to me. I'm really hoping that they can pull off another one along the lines of the Dawn of the Dead remake.

As for the new dvd, like most everyone here, I see nothing wrong with the old one, so I won't be getting this.

 

[Damin J Toell]

No, it shouldn't. When something is "remastered," a new master is created. If a HD remaster is done, the remaster is being done in HD. The goal of such a remaster is to create a new HD master tape. When that new HD master is downconverted to SD for DVD, the image is derived from an HD remaster. The DVD is not the remaster; the new master HD tape is the remaster. References to how the remastering was done should refer to the way in which the new master that was created, without reference to the downconverted DVD derivative. Thus, the remaster is done in HD, while the DVD is from the HD remaster.

DJ

 

[Dave Mack]

Unless my eyes are more shot than I think they are or my laptop screen is too small, I think its says "mastered in High Definition" I can't see "re" at the bottom of the above posted image. Was the original release mastered in Hi-Def? The old dvd looked pretty good to me, but then again they DID make a new transfer for "escape from N.Y." which was better than the 1st. Will be interesting....

One of my faves.


d

 

[Kevin M]

Yes, I know all of that but the implication from the wording is that this DVD is HD which it is not (IMO a marketing ploy for the standard semi-uninformed DVD crowd), more appropriate would be "DVD mastered from a new HD transfer", which is what most titles say, rather than a misleadingly brief "Mastered in HD" which gives a false impression IMO.

Semantics much.


And Dave is right, it actually says "mastered" rather than "Remastered"...whatever.
BTW, the first EFNY looked like crap as I recall so any improvement was a huge step up, but the first Fog release was really good to begin with so I seriously doubt that this will be along the same lines as EFNY.

 

[Eric DiPiazza]

I'll get this again for a new transfer.

 

[Chris Tedesco]

But I'm still trying to confirm is there a real difference in transfers.

 

[Kevin M]

I haven't seen any comparisons between the two online as yet....I haven't even seen a review as yet.
Anyone else?

 

[Dave Mack]

Well out of curiosity last nite I took out my old copy and nowhere on the box does it mention "hi-Def" anywhere so I went to DVDFile's review of the original dvd release and read this....
"The Fog has made its way to DVD, and MGM has thankfully sported for a new 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen transfer minted from a new high-def master."
So what does this mean? Probably the same transfer with perhaps better compression this time from better encoding?

Who knows...?

d

 

[Chris Tedesco]

So uh...again, can anyone confirm or deny that this is actually a different transfer from the original DVD?

 

[JoshB]

Day before its released and still no comments on the new DVD. I have actually been looking forward to this one since, although it is almost exactly liek the previous one, mine had some problems playing in the later part of the disc in one of my DVD players. Plus, I don't think I would ever need the P & S version.

 

[Dave Mack]

I'm surprised. NOBODY has seen this or gotten it yet??

odd...

 

[Kevin M]

Well I don't know about reviewers copies but maybe, maybe a great many people see this as just a rerelease of the former DVD....I mean nobody really knows if this truly is a "new" transfer or not.
I know I am not planning on running out & buying this because, unless this "new" transfer is so eye openingly dramatic that people fall to their knees in amazement, I have no reason to do so.
I am perfectly happy with the old release otherwise.

 

[Sam Davatchi]

Oh, oh I have this! Is this something special? Am I the first person on earth who got it?! I actually got it 4 days ago. What do you want me to do? I never got the previous DVD.

 

[Sam Davatchi]

I don’t want to spoil myself, never seen the movie, so here are 2 screengrabs from the new DVD. No where on the cover it says that it’s a new transfer.





Also, once again I was careful not to add too much of jpeg compression on the top. What you see is what you get and the artifacts are due to MPEG-2 compression and are from the video you get on the DVD.

 

[Tino]

So...you admit that you add compression to your screenshots, eh Sam?