MGM Announces Robocop SE 6/8 (1 Viewer)

[Michael Allred]

I was always disappointed with the transfer on Criterion's "Robocop" so I'll gladly pick up this box set. Plus I loved part 2 (more than the first one actually) and I never got around to buying that either so it looks like I'll only get stuck with one crappy movie (#3.)

 

[Grant H]

Count me in.

The only thing that sucks is the anamorphic transfer of Robocop will probably be mis-framed at 1.85:1 instead of 1.66:1 like the Criterion version.

Of course, when I blow it up with my scaler it gets cropped to 1.78:1 anyway.

Still an anamorphic 1.66:1 transfer would rock, but I'm pretty sure the existing transfer is 1.85:1.

 

[Richard Kim]

Well, if I understand correctly, RoboCop was shown theatrically in 1.85:1. 1.66:1 is Paul Verhoeven's preferred AR.

Since I have the Criterion RoboCop, I'll pass on the boxset and wait for MGM to release the SE seperately.

 

[Grant H]

That would make sense since 1.66:1 is European widescreen.

So, in America, we get it overmatted to 1.85:1 since most screens are 1.85:1 or 2.35:1.

Kind of like what happens when directors shoot Super 35, framing for 2:1 instead of 2.35:1 (read ST VI). Gets over-matted theatrically and then people go bonkers when it's released on video at a less-wide ratio than 2.35:1. I don't even want to start the debate over Top Gun.

Isn't that one of the theories as to why HDTV was chosen to be 1.78:1, since it's between the European and American Widescreen formats?

 

[Gary Seven]

I have the Criterion LD and am quite satisfied with the transfer of both video and sound. Doubtful I will purchase this.

 

[Harminder]

I was thinking about getting that version. Magnus T could you give some details about the R3 version of Robocop SE?

Is it the unrated extended cut, does it have a 5.1 Mix, how's the video transfer and what extras are on it? Thanks.

 

[Gary Nash]

You may wish to curb your enthusiasm.

I'd exercise some caution before pre-ordering.
This set was released in the UK a year or so back, with the first movie featuring the extra scenes of violence. The problem was with the way this had been mastered. I think it used extended-branching rather than seamless-branching which caused a noticeable pause each time the player had to locate the special edition segments.

Those of you with newer players, which are able to buffer layer changes quite well, might find that they can mask the extended branch, but I found it far too distracting.

Unless MGM have re-authored for the R1 edition, I'd be inclined to give this a miss.
Although the Criterion edition is only dolby surround and non-anamorphic, it's a pretty neat package, especially the additional features and nifty menus.

 

[PaulP]

I'll tolerate RoboCop 3 as a fluff bonus, but some may toss it altogether and place Criterion's RoboCop in its stead. Since the extras are different as are the commentary tracks, I'm getting the set and keeping both.

 

[Chas_Michael]

Hey Guys!!!! I'll take all your UNWANTED dreadful copies of Robocop 3 off your hands!

Alway's here to help

 

[CraigL]

The R3 version is JUST the extended cut. No branching and personally I really like it. I've had it for about a year and i just watched it for the first time. ALL the extras are the same as the R1. The extras never changed in any of the regions. R1 was just the last to get this one.

And btw...i have the Criterion as well. I'm keeping both.

I picked up the R3 boxed set for about $28 and sold my Robo2 dvd on Ebay for about $45.

 

[TheBat]

a friend of mine went to the UK last year and picked up the robocop boxset for me. Its pretty nice.. the packaging is kinda stylish, but a little akward once you open it up. opens from top, botttom, and the two sides. the menus are hard to read as first.. if you want to go to the second page or to start the movie.. they generated subtitles for the city and locations during the movie.. the place where you meet murphy the first time.. the sound is okay.. gets low in a few spots. I always watch the extended cut when I watch it. I didn't have any problems when the branching part with my dvd player. I did have the CC version and I do like the MGM one more.. has better extra features. for the cost that the CC was.. was not worth it, when you see other dvds loaded to the max. the docmentary was interesting, interviewing a bunch of people about the making of the film.

JACOB

 

[Josh Simpson]

If I find it cheap enough, I'll buy the box set. I like 2. 3 on the other hand, YUCK!

 

[stephen^wilson]

Can someone tell me where you can buy the region 3 version of robocop?

 

[PeterTHX]

Actually it was chosen because it's midway between 1.33 and 2.35 (identical matting to either top & bottom or the sides).

ALSO: As a major "Trek" fan, "ST:VI" was framed for 2.35 PERFECTLY. I saw it several times theatrically. Nick Meyer even said it was "framed for 'scope". Hopefully Paramount will finally release it properly for HD.

 

[Jeff Adkins]

People keep bringing up the UK PAL version, but I think this release will have more in common with the R3 Korean NTSC version which was uncut without using any branching.

Jeff

 

[Jeff Jacobson]

If you want the theatrical AR in this case, can't you just make a cardboard matte and put it over part of your TV?

 

[Jason Borchers]

.

 

[Grant H]

In the case fo ST VI the effects were done at about 2:1, not 2.35:1, at least somebody seemed to find support that that was the case.

The ST VI thread went all through this before and everyone tried to analzye Meyer's vague "scope" comment.

There have been 3 chances to frame the film at 2.35:1 and I don't see it happenening for HD since they have their HD master done now (including the new horrible flashes during the mind-meld). But, it's Meyer approved, so take it or leave it. Maybe another case of a great director going senile. Or, maybe he does in fact prefer the 2:1 or 2.1:1 framing, whatever it is.

As for 1.78 being equally between 1.33 and 2.35:1 it isn't quite. 1.84 is. Maybe the 1.78 is after overscan though. Mathematically 1.755 is in between 1.66 and 1.85, awfully close to 1.78. 25 thousandths vs 6 hundredths so mathematically that makes a lot of sense. Also, since widescreen TV's caught on faster overseas I could understand there being a compromise between a European AR and an American one.
I remember reading about both theories before somewhere on this forum probably. Don't remember which theory (if any) was ultimately proven correct. Maybe both.
That matting argument makes sense too. I believe I read TV was pushing for 1.78 (between 1.33 and 1.85) while the movie industry wanted something between 1.85 and 2.35. Maybe 2.1:1.

That would have been great for ST VI wouldn't it?
I can see that having benefitted a great deal of Super 35 films actually because I find most seem like they're compromised at the 2.35:1 AR and end up with a lot of unnecessary forehead cropping or are otherwise cramped vertically. I'm usually happy when they're opened up a little bit and we re-gain some material otherwise only seen in the 4:3 compositions. Of course every director or cinematographer differs in how much they cater to one format or the other (or how much they compromise the framing). Surely, many (especially in the past) thought about their work ultimately being seen more on TV and home video than theatrically (in 4:3).

Sorry, I started (and continued) to get this Off-Topic.

Hope that the R1 Robo isn't branching if it's going to cause problems. As quick as those snippets are that would really suck to have it hang up.

 

[MarcusUdeh]

I hope I'm not daydreaming this but during the original ad campaign for Robocop 2, wasn't the title Robocop 2:Maxium Rad? Btw there are several deleted scenes from this movie that likely won't make it on the DVD.

As much of a supporter of CCH Pounder’s acting career, I’ll be damned if I pick-up part 3. That and Wild Wild West are possibly the worst studio pictures I had the displeasure of glancing at.

 

[Larry P]

Too bad there is no supplemental material for Robo 2, a marvelous late 80's/early 90's all out, kick ass, pull-your spinal-cord-out, comic book film. Image or Vertigo Comics had nothing on this film. It was "The Passion of the Christ" of it's day, but without Jesus. Or theatergoers.

A Frank Miller commentary would have been great, since a lot of people misunderstood this film, and still do.

At least it's anamorphic.